Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Calpine Corp. Erisa Litigation

July 16, 2008

IN RE CALPINE CORPORATION ERISA LITIGATION


The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Saundra B. Armstrong

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ALL ACTIONS

CLASS ACTION

FINDINGS AND ORDER PRELIMINARILY CERTIFYING A CLASS FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, APPROVING FORM AND MANNER OF CLASS NOTICE, AND SETTING DATE FOR HEARING ON FINAL APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES AND CASE CONTRIBUTION COMPENSATION

This Action involves claims for alleged violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § § 1001, et seq.("ERISA"), with respect to the Calpine Corporation Retirement Savings Plan (the "Plan").

The terms of the Settlement are set out in a Class Action Settlement Agreement dated March 7, 2008 (the "Agreement" or "Settlement Agreement"), executed by counsel on behalf of the Plaintiff and the Defendants.*fn1

On July 16, 2008, the Court preliminarily considered the Settlement to determine, among other things, whether the Settlement is sufficient to warrant the issuance of notice to members of the Settlement Class. Upon reviewing the Settlement Agreement, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:

1. Class Findings: Solely for the purposes of the Settlement, the Court finds that the requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the United States Constitution, the Rules of the Court and any other applicable law have been met as to the Settlement Class defined below, in that:

(a) The Court preliminarily finds that, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1), the Settlement Class is ascertainable from records kept with respect to the Plan and from other objective criteria, and the members of the Settlement Class are so numerous that their joinder before the Court would be impracticable.

(b) The Court preliminarily finds that, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2), there are one or more questions of fact and/or law common to the Settlement Class.

(c) The Court preliminarily finds that, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3), the claims of the Named Plaintiff are typical of the claims of the Settlement Class.

(d) The Court preliminarily finds, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4), that the Named Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class in that (i) the interests of the Named Plaintiff and the nature of his alleged claims are consistent with those of the members of the Settlement Class, (ii) there appear to be no conflicts between Named Plaintiff and the Settlement Class, and (iii) the Named Plaintiff and the members of the Settlement Class are represented by qualified, reputable counsel who are experienced in preparing and prosecuting large, complicated ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class actions.

(e) The Court preliminarily finds that, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(1), the prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the Settlement Class would create a risk of (i) inconsistent or varying adjudications as to individual class members that would establish incompatible standards of conduct for the parties opposing the claims asserted in the ERISA Action or (ii) adjudications as to individual class members that would, as a practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of the other members not parties to the adjudications, or substantially impair or impede those persons' ability to protect their interests.

(f) The Court preliminarily finds that as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2), Named Plaintiff's claims are based on allegations that Defendants, through their conduct in the management and administration of the Plan, have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the class of plan participants as a whole, thereby making injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief on behalf of the class appropriate.

(g) The Court preliminarily finds that, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g), Class Counsel are capable of fairly and adequately representing the interests of the Settlement Class, in that Class Counsel have done extensive work identifying or investigating potential claims in the action, Class Counsel are experienced in handling class actions and claims of the type asserted in the Action; Class Counsel are knowledgeable of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.