Interesting Post-Comcast Class Certification Decisions Keep Coming

On September 30, 2013, Judge George B. Daniels of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Johnson, et al v. Nextel Communications, Inc., et. al., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141445 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2013) certified a class action –  pursuant to Rule 23(c)(4) – of 587 employees of Nextel Communications, Inc. (“Nextel”) who allege that Nextel, and the former plaintiffs’ law firm representing these employees, engaged in various illegal acts against them by entering into a Dispute Resolution Settlement Agreement (“DSRA”) to resolve their employment discrimination claims. The employees also sought to certify of smaller sub-class against the employees former law firm directly, but Judge Daniels denied this request on grounds of preclusion.

The ruling provides an interesting spin on Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 131 S. Ct. 1426 (2013), as well as the fall-out from tactics of a by-gone era when plaintiffs’ class action counsel used a “mass action” threat to secure settlements of employment discrimination claims.

To read this blog post click here