Skip to content

Blackman v. Gascho

Petition for certiorari denied on February 21, 2017

Docket No. Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
16-364 N/A N/A N/A N/A OT 2016

Issue: (1) Whether it is permissible to approve a "claims-made" settlement by calculating its value based on the value of payments to all potential claimants, rather than only payments to actual claimants, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2); and (2) whether it is permissible to approve a settlement that intentionally provides a disproportionate allocation of its pecuniary benefit to class counsel, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2).

SCOTUSblog Coverage

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
09/19/2016Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 21, 2016)
10/19/2016Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute. filed.
10/19/2016Waiver of right of respondent Global Fitness Holdings, LLC to respond filed.
10/19/2016Brief amici curiae of The Attorneys General of Alabama, et al. filed.
10/19/2016Waiver of right of respondents Robert Zik, James Heuaron and April Zik to respond filed.
10/21/2016Brief amicus curiae of Professor Lester Brickman filed.
10/21/2016Waiver of right of respondent Amber Gascho, et al. to respond filed.
11/07/2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of November 22, 2016.
11/15/2016Response Requested . (Due December 15, 2016)
11/29/2016Order extending time to file response to petition to and including January 17, 2017, for all respondents.
01/17/2017Brief of respondent Global Fitness Holdings, LLC in opposition filed. VIDED.
01/17/2017Brief of respondents Amber Gascho, et al. in opposition filed. VIDED.
01/31/2017Reply of petitioner Joshua Blackman filed. (Distributed)
02/01/2017DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 17, 2017.
02/21/2017Petition DENIED.