United States Sixth Circuit

In challenges brought by objecting retirees of Ford and GM to a settlement between their union and the companies of a class action ERISA dispute over retiree healthcare benefits, a decision certifying a class and approving the settlement agreement is affirmed over claims that: 1) the class representation was not "fair and adequate"; 2) the notice of the class settlement was not reasonable; 3) the settlement agreements were not "fair, reasonable, and adequate"; and 4) the objectors should have been given additional discovery.

Appellate Information

• Argued 06/07/2007
• Decided 08/07/2007
• Published 08/07/2007

Judges

• Before: MARTIN and SUTTON, Circuit Judges;  GRAHAM, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Mark S. Baumkel, Provizer & Phillips, Bingham Farms, Michigan, James R. Malone, Jr., Chimicles & Tikellis, Haverford, Pennsylvania, for Appellants.  Julia Penny Clark, Bredhoff & Kaiser, Washington, D.C., William T. Payne, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Richard C. Godfrey, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Illinois, Jonathan L. Abram, Hogan & Hartson, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:  Mark S. Baumkel, Provizer & Phillips, Bingham Farms, Michigan, James R. Malone, Jr., Daniel B. Scott, Chimicles & Tikellis, Haverford, Pennsylvania, for Appellants.  Julia Penny Clark, John M. West, Bredhoff & Kaiser, Washington, D.C., John E. Stember, Edward J. Feinstein, Stember, Feinstein, Doyle & Payne, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, William T. Payne, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Richard C. Godfrey, John F. Hagan, Jr., Andrew B. Bloomer, Catherine L. Fitzpatrick, Kirkland & Ellis, Chicago, Illinois, Jonathan L. Abram, Hogan & Hartson, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.