Prudential Ins. Co. of America Sales Practices Litigation, In re

Decision Date23 July 1998
Docket NumberNo. 97-5217,97-5156,No. 95-6062,97-5217 and 97-5312,Nos. 97-5155,95-6062,s. 97-5155,97-5217
Citation148 F.3d 283
PartiesIn re: THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION. Richard P. KRELL, MDL transfer, N.D. Ohio, DNJ Civil Actionv. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Richard P. Krell, as well as Objectors Elizabeth Bajek, Amanda Bajek, Helen Bartsch, Mark Ciconte, Raymond Dolce, Margaret Dolice, Louise Duggan, Peter Duggan, Charles Duncan, Mary Howe, Mary Krell, William Morris, Diana Racer, Thomas Racer, Gweneth Reidel, The Estate of Carl J. Scalzo, Marie Scalzo, Terry Sligar, Alice Smith, Jerry Smith, and William Walton, Appellants at/5156/5312. In re PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY AMERICA SALES PRACTICE LITIGATION AGENT ACTIONS. Richard Johnson, Intervenor-Plaintiff in District Court, Richard E. Johnson, Appellant at , 97-5156, 97-5217 and 97-5312.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Michael P. Malakoff (Argued), Malakoff, Doyle & Finberg, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellants Richard P. Krell, et al.

Lynde Selden, II, Lynde Selden Chartered, San Diego, California, for Appellant Richard E. Johnson.

Melvyn I. Weiss (Argued), Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach, New York City, Allyn Z. Lite, Goldstein, Lite & DePalma, Newark, New Jersey, for Appellee George A. Zoller, Class Action Plaintiff Representative.

Reid L. Ashinoff (Argued), Michael H. Barr, Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, New

York City, for Appellees Prudential Insurance Company of America and Ron D. Barbaro.

Brian S. Wolfman (Argued), Alan B. Morrison, Public Citizen Litigation Group, Washington, DC, for Amicus Curiae-Appellant Public Citizen, Inc.

John J. Gibbons, Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, Newark, New Jersey, for Appellee Robert C. Winters.

Frederick B. Lacey, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, Newark, New Jersey, for Appellee Frances K. Beck, as Executrix of the Estate of Robert A. Beck.

Before: SCIRICA, ROTH and RENDELL, Circuit Judges.

OPINION OF THE COURT

SCIRICA, Circuit Judge.

                                               TABLE OF CONTENTS
                OPINION OF THE COURT ...................................................... 288
                    I.  BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY ................................. 290
                        A.     The Multi"State Life Insurance Task Force .................. 290
                        B.     The Federal Class Action ................................... 292
                               1.     The Proposed Settlement ............................. 294
                                      a.    The Alternative Dispute Resolution Process .... 295
                                      b.    Basic Claim Relief ............................ 296
                                      c.    Enhancements To the Task Force Plan ........... 296
                               2.     The Fairness Hearing ................................ 298
                   II.  ISSUES RAISED ON APPEAL AND STANDARD OF REVIEW .................... 299
                  III.  JURISDICTION ...................................................... 299
                        A.     Subject Matter Jurisdiction ................................ 299
                               1.     Federal Question Jurisdiction as a Basis for
                                        Supplemental Jurisdiction ......................... 300
                               2.     Diversity Jurisdiction as a Basis for Supplemental
                                        Jurisdiction ...................................... 303
                        B.     Personal Jurisdiction ...................................... 306
                        C.     Article III ................................................ 306
                   IV.  CLASS CERTIFICATION ............................................... 307
                        A.     Settlement"Only Class Certification ........................ 307
                        B.     Class Certification under Rule 23 .......................... 308
                               1.     The Rule 23(a) Criteria ............................. 309
                                      a.    Numerosity .................................... 309
                                      b.    Commonality ................................... 309
                                      c.    Typicality .................................... 310
                                      d.    Adequacy of Representation .................... 312
                               2.     The Rule 23(b) Criteria ............................. 313
                                      a.    Predominance .................................. 314
                                      b.    Superiority ................................... 315
                        C.     Conclusion ................................................. 316
                    V.  THE FAIRNESS OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT ........................... 316
                        A.     The Girsh Factors .......................................... 318
                               1.     The complexity and duration of the litigation ....... 318
                               2.     The reaction of the class to the settlement ......... 318
                               3.     The stage of the proceedings and amount of discovery
                                        completed ......................................... 319
                               4.     The risks of establishing liability and damages ..... 319
                                      a.    Replacement Claims ............................ 320
                               5.     The risks of maintaining the class action through
                                        trial ............................................. 321
                               6.     The ability of the defendants to withstand a greater
                                        judgment .......................................... 321
                               7.     The range of reasonableness of the settlement fund
                                        in light of the best possible recovery and all the
                                        attendant risks of litigation ..................... 322
                        B.     Other Objections ........................................... 324
                               1.     The Rules Enabling Act and the McCarran"Ferguson Act  324
                               2.     Failure to Allow Discovery .......................... 324
                        C.     "Other Sales Claims " ...................................... 325
                               1.     The Alleged Expansion of the Class .................. 325
                               2.     Adequacy of Class Notice ............................ 326
                        D.     Conclusion ................................................. 328
                   VI.  ATTORNEYS' FEES ................................................... 329
                        A.     The Fee Agreement .......................................... 329
                        B.     Fee Opinion ................................................ 330
                        C.     Analysis ................................................... 333
                               1.     "Clear"Sailing" Fee Agreement ....................... 334
                               2.     Adverse Effect on Class Members ..................... 335
                               3.     Fairness of the Award ............................... 336
                                      a.    The Value of the Settlement ................... 336
                                      b.    The Appropriate Percentage Recovery ........... 338
                                      c.    Lodestar Calculation .......................... 340
                                            i.    Multiplier .............................. 340
                                            ii.   Time Records ............................ 341
                        D.     Conclusion ................................................. 342
                  VII.  KRELL'S MOTION TO RECUSE .......................................... 342
                        A.     Procedural History ......................................... 342
                        B.     Legal Standard ............................................. 343
                        C.     Krell's Arguments on Appeal ................................ 343
                               1.     Ex Parte Meetings ................................... 343
                               2.     The Conference With State Insurance Regulators ...... 344
                               3.     Rutt v. Prudential .................................. 345
                 VIII.  CONCLUSION ........................................................ 346
                

This is an appeal from the approval of the settlement of a nationwide class action lawsuit against Prudential Life Insurance Company alleging deceptive sales practices affecting over 8 million claimants throughout the fifty states and the District of Columbia.

The class is comprised of Prudential policyholders who allegedly were the victims of fraudulent and misleading sales practices employed by Prudential's sales force. The challenged sales practices consisted primarily of churning, vanishing premiums and fraudulent investment plans, and each cause of action is based on fraud or deceptive conduct. There are no allegations of personal injury; there are no futures classes. The settlement creates an alternative dispute resolution mechanism and establishes protocols to determine the kind and amount of relief to be granted. The relief awarded includes full compensatory damages consisting of what plaintiffs thought they were purchasing from the insurance agent. There is no cap on the amount of compensatory damages for those who qualify, and although punitive damages are not included in the settlement, Prudential has agreed to pay a remediation amount in addition to the payments made through dispute resolution process.

The case involves five consolidated appeals from the judgments of the District Court for the District of New Jersey approving the settlement and awarding attorneys' fees to class counsel. Appellants, members of the certified class who object to the settlement, challenge the district court's jurisdiction, the certification of the settlement class, the fairness of the settlement itself, the award of attorneys' fees, and the district court's refusal to disqualify itself.

We hold the district court properly exercised jurisdiction. Federal subject matter jurisdiction is properly grounded on the alleged violations of the federal securities laws. Although most of the claims implicate state law, supplemental jurisdiction is proper because all of the claims arise out of a common nucleus of operative fact. The district court had...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1071 cases
  • In re Allergan Biocell Textured Breast Implant Prods. Liab. Litig.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • 19 d5 Março d5 2021
    ... ... BREAST IMPLANT PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION Case No. 2:19-md-2921-BRM-ESK MDL No. 2921 United ... consumer fraud and deceptive trade practices acts (Counts 33082), unjust enrichment (Counts ... (In re Plavix Mktg., Sales Practice & Prods Liab. Litig. ), 332 F. Supp. 3d ... Farm Bureau Ins. v. Amazon , 498 F.Supp.3d 1075, 1080 (S.D. Ind ... Volkswagen of America, Inc. , 512 F.2d 1294, 1297 (6th Cir. 1975) ) ... Supp. 2d at 50405 (citing In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions ... ...
  • In re Intelligroup Securities Litigation
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • 13 d2 Novembro d2 2007
    ... ... Aetna Life Ins. Co., 375 F.Supp.2d 956, 965 (C.D.Cal.2005) (taking ... No. 104-369, p. 31 (1995) (criticizing "abusive" practices including "the routine filing of lawsuits ... with only a ... , Inc., 259 F.3d 154, 183 (3d Cir.2001) (citing Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions, 148 F.3d ... ...
  • Wragg v. Ortiz
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • 27 d3 Maio d3 2020
    ... ... 2012) (citing Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of Am. , 511 U.S. 375, 377, 114 S.Ct. 1673, ... , fundamental changes to policies and practices. As to the third element of a Rehabilitation Act ... is an exception to the usual rule that litigation is conducted by and on behalf of the individual ... Marcus v. BMW of North America, LLC , 687 F.3d 583, 590 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing ... in pursuing the class action." In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practices Litig. , 962 F ... ...
  • In re Enron Corp. Securities
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 8 d1 Setembro d1 2008
    ... ... SECURITIES, DERIVATIVE & "ERISA" LITIGATION ... Mark Newby, et al., Plaintiffs ... Enron ... Shaw v. Toshiba America Information Systems, 91 F.Supp.2d 942, 967, n ... case.'" Id., at 306, quoting In re Prudential Ins. Co. America Sales Practice Litig. Agent ... litigation as "illustrat[ing] the best practices in class action," "a model of transparency" in ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
  • Court Approves Class Action Settlement And Award Of Attorney's Fees And Costs
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 14 d5 Outubro d5 2011
    ...in Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153, 157 (3d Cir. 1975) and relevant factors outlined in In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig., 148 F.3d 283, 309 (3d Cir. 1998). Here the Court considered the following in approving the settlement: 1) the complexity, expense, and likely duration o......
  • FCRA Newsletter - November 18, 2011
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 23 d3 Novembro d3 2011
    ...in Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153, 157 (3d Cir. 1975) and relevant factors outlined in In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig., 148 F.3d 283, 309 (3d Cir. 1998). Here, the Court considered the following in approving the settlement: 1) the complexity, expense, and likely duration ......
21 books & journal articles
  • Indirect Purchaser Settlements
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library Indirect Purchaser Litigation Handbook. Second Edition
    • 5 d1 Dezembro d1 2016
    ...court. This section accordingly focuses on federal requirements. 112 . In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283, 326-27 (3d Cir. 1998) (internal quotation marks and quoting citation omitted). Accord Rodriguez v. W. Publ’g Corp., 563 F.3d 948, 962 (9th ......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Preparing for Trial in Federal Court
    • 4 d2 Maio d2 2010
    ...Hi-Bred Int’l., Inc., 238 F.3d 1370, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2001), §6:22 In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions , 148 F.3d 283, 341 (3d Cir. 1998), Form 7-48 In re Prudential Ins. Co. of American Sales Practices Litig. , 148 F.3d 283, 340 (3d Cir. 1998), Form 7-48 In ......
  • Tax violations.
    • United States
    • American Criminal Law Review Vol. 46 No. 2, March 2009
    • 22 d0 Março d0 2009
    ...was true income as opposed to a gift); see also supra Section II.B.2.b. (explaining lack of willfulness defense). But cf. Moses, 148 F.3d at 283 (refuting defendant's argument that government presented insufficient evidence of (176.) 424 U.S. 648 (1976). (177.) Id. at 663 n.18 (recognizing ......
  • Settling competition concerns
    • United States
    • ABA Antitrust Library State Antitrust Enforcement Handbook. Third Edition
    • 9 d0 Dezembro d0 2018
    ...and effect of judgments entered in class action settlements). 62. See, e.g. , In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. Sales Practice Litig., 148 F.3d 283, 326 (3d Cir. 1998) (approving class action settlement that covered claims not pleaded in complaint but that arose “out of the same conduct alle......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
4 provisions
  • Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Class Actions
    • United States
    • US Code 2019 Edition Title 28 Appendix Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules of Civil Procedure For the United States District Courts [1] Title III. Pleadings Andmotions
    • 1 d2 Janeiro d2 2019
    ...of many factors that may deserve consideration is provided by In re: Prudential Ins. Co. America Sales Practice Litigation Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283, 316-324 (3d Cir. 1998). Further guidance can be found in the Manual for Complex Litigation.The court must make findings that support the co......
  • 28 APPENDIX U.S.C. § 23 Class Actions
    • United States
    • US Code 2022 Edition Title 28 Appendix Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules of Civil Procedure For the United States District Courts
    • 1 d6 Janeiro d6 2022
    ...of many factors that may deserve consideration is provided by In re: Prudential Ins. Co. America Sales Practice Litigation Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283, 316-324 (3d Cir. 1998). Further guidance can be found in the Manual for Complex The court must make findings that support the conclusion th......
  • 28 APPENDIX U.S.C. § 23 Class Actions
    • United States
    • US Code 2020 Edition Title 28 Appendix Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rules of Civil Procedure For the United States District Courts [1] Title IV. Parties
    • 1 d3 Janeiro d3 2020
    ...of many factors that may deserve consideration is provided by In re: Prudential Ins. Co. America Sales Practice Litigation Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283, 316-324 (3d Cir. 1998). Further guidance can be found in the Manual for Complex Litigation.The court must make findings that support the co......
  • 28 APPENDIX U.S.C. § 23 Class Actions
    • United States
    • US Code 2023 Edition Title 28 Appendix Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Title IV. Parties
    • 1 d0 Janeiro d0 2023
    ...of many factors that may deserve consideration is provided by In re: Prudential Ins. Co. America Sales Practice Litigation Agent Actions, 148 F.3d 283, 316-324 (3d Cir. 1998). Further guidance can be found in the Manual for Complex Litigation.The court must make findings that support the co......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT