Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Class Notice Online Works Just Fine

April 5, 2017 by Amy Lane Hurwitz and Gary M. Pappas

In a case involving alleged violations of ERISA and the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act, the District Court of the Western District of Kentucky certified a class of Anthem Health Plan insureds who were denied coverage or reimbursement for Applied Behavior Analysis, a particular treatment for Autism Spectrum Disorders. The court then ordered plaintiff to submit a proposed draft notice to be sent to class members. The parties agreed (for the most part) on the content of the notice, but a dispute arose regarding the method of delivery to the class members.

Plaintiff proposed direct mail notice supplemented with a class website, which would serve as a central location for posting the notice as well as any related class documents, including the complaint, the order certifying the class, and future scheduling orders or briefing on significant issues. Anthem opposed the website, arguing that the class was not large enough to require this medium and that using the website would put the onus on class members to monitor the litigation. In addition, Anthem argued that material posted online is at risk of “dissemination and distortion” and proposed as an alternative that the website be password-protected with unique passwords for each class member.

The court analyzed plaintiff’s proposed notice under the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2)(B), which provides that “the court must direct to class members the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, including individual notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort.” The court recognized that notice by mail is preferred where, as here, the names and addresses of most class members were known. But the court cited numerous opinions – and quoted from the Manual for Complex Litigation – approving websites as a useful, relatively low cost supplement to direct individual notice in class action litigation.

As a result, the court rejected Anthem’s objections. The court also declined Anthem’s alternative proposal to require password protection for the website, finding no reason why passwords would be necessary or beneficial under the circumstances of this case.

Wilson v. Anthem Health Plans of Kentucky, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-743-TBR (D.KY., March 21, 2017)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

No Pick-Off, No Problem: How a Pre-Certification Rule 68 Offer Survived (Twice)

Next Article »

Supreme Court to Resolve Whether Failure to Disclose Under Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K Gives Rise to Securities Fraud Claims
Amy Lane Hurwitz

About Amy Lane Hurwitz

Amy Hurwitz is a shareholder at Carlton Fields in Miami, Florida. Connect with Amy on LinkedIn.

Gary M. Pappas

About Gary M. Pappas

Gary Pappas is a shareholder at Carlton Fields in Miami, Florida. Connect with Gary on LinkedIn.

Get Weekly Updates!

2020 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • MDL Court Denies Class Certification of Proposed “NAS Babies” Class
  • What’s Good for Trial Is Good for Class Certification: Fifth Circuit Rules That Daubert Applies at Class Certification Stage
  • One Game, One Stadium: Eleventh Circuit Spikes Collateral Challenge to Tampa Bay Buccaneers Proposed Class Action Settlement

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Classified Logo
© 2014–2021 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.