By: Derek Hawkins//October 21, 2019//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Jerome Senegal, et al. v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A.
Case No.: 19-1141
Officials: EASTERBROOK, KANNE, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Class Action – Opt Out of Settlement
The district court certified a class of African-American financial advisers who worked at JPMorgan Chase Bank between 2013 and 2018. This class, which has about 250 members, alleged that the Bank treated them less favorably than equivalent advisers of other races or backgrounds. The parties filed a settlement together with the complaint. The agreement, a product of 16 months’ presuit negotiations, includes a payment of $19.5 million for the benefit of class members who do not opt out, plus changes in the Bank’s operations and a fund of about $4.5 million to cover the costs of those changes and establish a reserve for unexpected events. The order certifying the class relied on Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) with respect to the operational changes and Rule 23(b)(3) with respect to the proposed payments to class members.
They present several arguments. They contend, for example, that the judge did not make the findings required by Rule 23 for a settlement class, see Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997), and that because they are still in the class—members just can’t opt out of (b)(2) classes—the judge should have listened to their protests despite what the notice said. They maintain that the notice did not provide enough information for them to make a reasoned decision whether to opt out of the financial portion of the relief. They also assert that the settlement provides too much ($4.5 million) to implement the new employment practices and not enough ($19.5 million) for distribution to class members. But they did not either object to the language of the notice or ask for reinstatement as full class members. And this leads the appellees (the Bank plus the class representatives) to contend that they lack “standing to appeal.”
Only persons aggrieved by a judgment may appeal from it. See, e.g., Deposit Guaranty National Bank v. Roper, 445 U.S. 326, 333 (1980). These objectors are not aggrieved by the decisions of which they complain, so the appeal is dismissed.
Dismissed