Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-01371367DOJ Data Set 10Other

EFTA01371367

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 10
Reference
efta-01371367
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity

Summary

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Page 23 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97188, * the merits of the case," so this factors weighs in favor of settlement. See Martina, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145285, 2013 WL 5567157, at *6 (finding adequate appreciation of merits when parties "exchanged initial disclosures and arrived at the Settlement after negotiation before a retired federal judge."). 4. Girsh factors four and five: the risks of establishing liability and damages The fourth and fifth Girth factors require the Court to balance the Parties' relative likelihood of success in establishing liability and damages against the immediate benefits derived from a settlement. See Prudential, 148 F.3d at 319. The Court weighs these factors against the best and worst possible outcomes for Plaintiffs. In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 237-39 (3d Cir. 2001). Although Plaintiffs survived an initial motion to dismiss, see ECF No. 39, the Court has not yet ruled on the substantive issues underlying the litigation — namely, whether Defendants caused defective timing chain tensioners to be installed in the Class Vehicles and whether they are liable for damages. The Court lacks the factual record necessary to determine Plaintiffs' likelihood of success on the merits, but Plaintiffs claim that "all parties," including Defendants, "remain confident of their chance at prevailing at trial." ECF No. 92 at 26-27. Plaintiffs state that [*52] their best possible outcome would likely involve "years of litigation," including an appeal to the Third Circuit after Plaintiffs received a favorable decision in this Court. Id. at 27. This would require "a very substantial expenditure in attorneys' fees and costs by both parties," but would likely "not result in an increased benefit to the Class." Id. Though it is difficult to accurately estimate Plaintiffs' likelihood of success in establishing either liability or damages, the Court finds that the fourth and fifth Girsh factors weigh in favor of approving the settlement. 5. Girsh factor six: the risks of maintaining a class action The sixth Girsh factor "measures the likelihood of obtaining and keeping a class certification if the action were to proceed to trial. A district court retains the authority to decertify or modify a class at any time during the litigation if it proves to be unmanageable." Warfarin Sodium, 391 F.3d at 537 (citing Prudential, 148 F.3d at 321). Because of this, the "specter of decertification makes settlement an appealing alternative." O'Brien v. Brain Research Labs, LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113809, 2012 WL 3242365, at *18 (D.N.J. Aug. 9, 2012). Plaintiffs maintain -- and the Court agrees, at this point -- that this action could be properly maintained as a class action. ECF No. 92 at 27. Although Plaintiffs speculate that there are "myriad p531 risks of maintaining class action status," including potential arguments Defendants may raise involving individualized issues, id. at 28, the Court is not convinced that this factor weighs in favor of approving the settlement. 6. Girsh factor seven: the ability of Defendants to withstand a greater judgment The seventh Girsh factor considers "whether the defendants could withstand a judgment for an amount significantly greater than the [s]ettlement." In re Cendant, 264 F.3d at 240. Still, the fact that a defendant "could afford to pay more does not mean that it is obligated For internal use only CONFIDENTIAL - PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P. 6(e) DB-SDNY-0064702 CONFIDENTIAL SDNY_GM_00210886 EFTA01371367

Technical Artifacts (2)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Phone3242365
Phone5567157

Related Documents (6)

Dept. of JusticeOtherUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01368235

rdc DB27000P - Deutsche Bank - CAR Integration Alert Batch Date: Added to Monitoring: 04/02/2018 4/2/2018 Alert Date: 4/2/2018 Person Name: Jeffrey Edward Epstein Address: (Global Search) UNITED STATES Tracking ID: Date of Birth: 01/20/1953 Reporting ID: Alerted Entity #: 1 of 1 Risk Priority: Critical Alert ID • South Florida Sun-Sentinel, MEDIA Article.United States.Headline:DETAILS OF EPSTEIN'S PLEA DEAL RELEASED, http://global.factiva.com/en/du/article.asp?NAPC=S&Accessi

1p
Dept. of JusticeOtherUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01377870

Page 4 Talking with Judge Jeannine Pint about Liars, Liberals and Leakers The Queens Gazette (New York) September 5, 2018 government within a government, that, Pirro contends, has conspired to undermine the Trump presidency. These high ranking anti- Trump officials named in "Liars, Leakers and Liberals" include Special Counsel Robert Mueller, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, former Head of the FBI James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA ch

1p
Dept. of JusticeOtherUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01363306

Page 20 748 F.2d 602, *; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 15990, **; 1984-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P66,311; 40 Fed. R. Serv. 2d (Callaghan) 954 [HN11] The decision whether to allow substitution is discretionary. Collateral Control Corp. v. Deal (In re Covington Grain Co.), 638 F.2d 1357, 1360 (5th Cir. Unit B 1981); Prop-Jets, Inc. v. Chandler, 575 F.2d 1322, 1324 (10th Cir.1978); Fontana v. United Bonding Insurance Co., 468 F.2d 168, 170 (3d Cir.1972). In this case, the district court refused substitution

1p
OtherUnknown

Table of Contents

DOJ EFTA Data Set 10 document EFTA01265841

45p
Dept. of JusticeOtherUnknown

EFTA Document EFTA01377950

Page 14 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139535, * declines to compel a response to this request. See, e.g., World Triathlon Corp. v. SRS Sports Centre SDN, BHD, Case No. 8:04-cv-1594-T-24TBM, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15412, at *2 (M.D. Fla. July 29, 2005)("the court may limit discovery upon the determination that the discovery sought is unreasonably burdensome or expensive or the expense of the proposed discovery outweighs its likely benefit, taking into account the needs of the case, the amount in co

1p
Dept. of JusticeAug 22, 2017

15 July 7 2016 - July 17 2016 working progress_Redacted.pdf

Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Irons, Janet < Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:47 AM Richard C. Smith     Hello Warden Smith,     mother is anxious to hear the results of your inquiry into her daughter's health.   I'd be grateful if you could  email or call me at your earliest convenience.  I'm free today after 2 p.m.  Alternatively, we could meet after the Prison  Board of Inspectors Meeting this coming Thursday.    Best wishes,    Janet Irons    1 Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent:

1196p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.