Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements

Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements

This Article uses two recent decisions - one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors - to explore deeper connections between class-action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Brigham Young University law review 2023-01, Vol.48 (7), p.2221-2279
Hauptverfasser: Tidmarsh, Jay, Marumo, Tladi
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Class action lawsuits
Fair value
Fiduciaries
Law
Liability
Profits
Restitution
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 2279
container_issue 7
container_start_page 2221
container_title Brigham Young University law review
container_volume 48
creator Tidmarsh, Jay
Marumo, Tladi
description This Article uses two recent decisions - one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors - to explore deeper connections between class-action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law of restitution led both courts astray. First, courts can approve incentive awards, as long as an award properly reflects the benefit that the representative's efforts bestowed on the class. Second, restitution provides a basis to disgorge improper side payments to objectors, but only under conditions different from those that the court described. More broadly, attention to the substantive and remedial principles of restitution can provide useful solutions to vexing problems of class-action practice.
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2849071362</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2849071362</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-proquest_journals_28490713623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNi8kKwjAURYMoWId_CLi1kMGmdas4rQR14a5EGyGlJjXv1e83gh_g6nK45_RIIrgSaZHlok8SJhVLecavQzICqBnjTCiZkMPO-4qeTBsMGIca7dvAnK50RY-32tzRh4jafR1Aix1a76h1dN1oAHo2iI15xhImZPDQDZjpb8dktt1c1vu0Df7VxbisfRdcvEpRLJYs51IJ-Z_1AXD7PZA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2849071362</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements</title><source>HeinOnline</source><source>Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ）</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Tidmarsh, Jay ; Marumo, Tladi</creator><creatorcontrib>Tidmarsh, Jay ; Marumo, Tladi</creatorcontrib><description>This Article uses two recent decisions - one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors - to explore deeper connections between class-action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law of restitution led both courts astray. First, courts can approve incentive awards, as long as an award properly reflects the benefit that the representative's efforts bestowed on the class. Second, restitution provides a basis to disgorge improper side payments to objectors, but only under conditions different from those that the court described. More broadly, attention to the substantive and remedial principles of restitution can provide useful solutions to vexing problems of class-action practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0360-151X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2162-8572</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Provo: Brigham Young University, Reuben Clark Law School</publisher><subject>Class action lawsuits ; Fair value ; Fiduciaries ; Law ; Liability ; Profits ; Restitution</subject><ispartof>Brigham Young University law review, 2023-01, Vol.48 (7), p.2221-2279</ispartof><rights>Copyright Brigham Young University, Reuben Clark Law School 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tidmarsh, Jay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marumo, Tladi</creatorcontrib><title>Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements</title><title>Brigham Young University law review</title><description>This Article uses two recent decisions - one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors - to explore deeper connections between class-action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law of restitution led both courts astray. First, courts can approve incentive awards, as long as an award properly reflects the benefit that the representative's efforts bestowed on the class. Second, restitution provides a basis to disgorge improper side payments to objectors, but only under conditions different from those that the court described. More broadly, attention to the substantive and remedial principles of restitution can provide useful solutions to vexing problems of class-action practice.</description><subject>Class action lawsuits</subject><subject>Fair value</subject><subject>Fiduciaries</subject><subject>Law</subject><subject>Liability</subject><subject>Profits</subject><subject>Restitution</subject><issn>0360-151X</issn><issn>2162-8572</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNqNi8kKwjAURYMoWId_CLi1kMGmdas4rQR14a5EGyGlJjXv1e83gh_g6nK45_RIIrgSaZHlok8SJhVLecavQzICqBnjTCiZkMPO-4qeTBsMGIca7dvAnK50RY-32tzRh4jafR1Aix1a76h1dN1oAHo2iI15xhImZPDQDZjpb8dktt1c1vu0Df7VxbisfRdcvEpRLJYs51IJ-Z_1AXD7PZA</recordid><startdate>20230101</startdate><enddate>20230101</enddate><creator>Tidmarsh, Jay</creator><creator>Marumo, Tladi</creator><general>Brigham Young University, Reuben Clark Law School</general><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230101</creationdate><title>Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements</title><author>Tidmarsh, Jay ; Marumo, Tladi</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-proquest_journals_28490713623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Class action lawsuits</topic><topic>Fair value</topic><topic>Fiduciaries</topic><topic>Law</topic><topic>Liability</topic><topic>Profits</topic><topic>Restitution</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tidmarsh, Jay</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marumo, Tladi</creatorcontrib><collection>Global News &amp; ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>ABI-INFORM Complete</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Brigham Young University law review</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tidmarsh, Jay</au><au>Marumo, Tladi</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements</atitle><jtitle>Brigham Young University law review</jtitle><date>2023-01-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>2221</spage><epage>2279</epage><pages>2221-2279</pages><issn>0360-151X</issn><eissn>2162-8572</eissn><abstract>This Article uses two recent decisions - one prohibiting incentive awards to class representatives and one permitting disgorgement of side payments to class objectors - to explore deeper connections between class-action settlements and the law of restitution. The failure to correctly apply the law of restitution led both courts astray. First, courts can approve incentive awards, as long as an award properly reflects the benefit that the representative's efforts bestowed on the class. Second, restitution provides a basis to disgorge improper side payments to objectors, but only under conditions different from those that the court described. More broadly, attention to the substantive and remedial principles of restitution can provide useful solutions to vexing problems of class-action practice.</abstract><cop>Provo</cop><pub>Brigham Young University, Reuben Clark Law School</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0360-151X
ispartof Brigham Young University law review, 2023-01, Vol.48 (7), p.2221-2279
issn 0360-151X
2162-8572
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2849071362
source HeinOnline; Free E-Journal (出版社公開部分のみ）; Business Source Complete
subjects Class action lawsuits
Fair value
Fiduciaries
Law
Liability
Profits
Restitution
title Good Representatives, Bad Objectors, and Restitution in Class Settlements
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-14T14%3A17%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Good%20Representatives,%20Bad%20Objectors,%20and%20Restitution%20in%20Class%20Settlements&rft.jtitle=Brigham%20Young%20University%20law%20review&rft.au=Tidmarsh,%20Jay&rft.date=2023-01-01&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=2221&rft.epage=2279&rft.pages=2221-2279&rft.issn=0360-151X&rft.eissn=2162-8572&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2849071362%3C/proquest%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2849071362&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true