The Court made an initial decision in favor of the Plaintiffs, but after that decision there was another similar case decided in favor of the Defendants in the same court of appeals to which an appeal from this case would be taken. That decision led Defendants to file a Motion to Reconsider (the “Motion to Reconsider”) the Court’s initial decision for Plaintiffs in this case.
The Defendants argued that the court of appeals decision in the other case meant that the Court in this case had to reverse its initial decision and instead rule in favor of the Defendants. If the Court granted the Motion to Reconsider, or if it denied that motion but was reversed by the court of appeals, the Plaintiffs would get nothing at all in this case. Defendants are settling because they cannot be sure they would prevail on their Motion to Reconsider and to avoid the expense, inconvenience, and disruption of continuing this litigation. Similarly, Plaintiffs cannot be sure that they would win on the Motion to Reconsider, particularly since that ultimately would be decided by the same court of appeals that ruled in favor of the Defendants in the similar case.
Plaintiffs and their attorneys thus believe that the Settlement is in the best interests of the Class because it provides a recovery for Class Members now while avoiding the risk of obtaining no funds at all for the Class if the Defendants prevail on their Motion to Reconsider, as well as eliminating the expense and delay of pursuing the case through trial and appeal.
Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP 301 East Fourth Street | Suite 3500, Great American Tower | Cincinnati, Ohio 45202