Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Keep the Change – The Southern District of New York Authorizes Claims Administrator to Retain Portion of Accrued Interest on Settlement Funds

December 5, 2017 by David L. Luck and D. Matthew Allen

When class action settlement funds are not amenable to individual claims or to a meaningful pro rata distribution, courts have used the cy pres doctrine to distribute the funds to nonprofit charitable organizations whose work indirectly benefits the class members and advances the public interest.

However, cy pres proved unnecessary in Dial Corp. v. News Corp., No. 13CV6802, 2017 WL 5613949 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2017). That antitrust action involved the distribution of a $250 million settlement fund, but the claims administrator and lead class counsel performed the distribution so efficiently that only $1.97 in accrued interest remained undistributed.

The court characterized this amount as “a sum so miniscule that attempting to distribute it among class claimants pro rata would be akin to splitting the atom.” It concluded that resorting to cy pres was needless for so small an amount. Instead, the court authorized the claims administrator to “keep the change.”

Dial Corp. v. News Corp., No. 13CV6802, 2017 WL 5613949 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 20, 2017).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

Charges by Law Firm-Owned Vendors Challenged in Putative Client Class

Next Article »

SeaWorld Shareholders See Red After World Sees Blackfish
Avatar

About David L. Luck

D. Matthew Allen

About D. Matthew Allen

Matt Allen is a shareholder at Carlton Fields in Tampa, Florida.

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.