Thomas, Walter J. v. Albright, Madeleine

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that courts “should not reject a settlement merely because individual class members complain that they would have received more had they prevailed after a trial”
• noting that the district court did not make findings necessary for a (b)(3) class action and then noting that ''[t]o the contrary, the court made all the factual findings to show that a hybrid class was not appropriate”
• affirming district court approval of settlement where injunction redresses past and deters future discrimination in assignments and inhibits future retaliation
• rejecting named plaintiffs motion to opt out of (b)(2) action at settlement
• assumption of cohesiveness underlying certification of a (b)(2) class is not necessarily destroyed when claims for injunctive relief are coupled with individual claims for monetary damages
• settlement can be fair even if “a significant portion of the class and some of the named plaintiffs object to it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).