SETTLEMENT OF PORT CHARGES CLASS ACTION APPROVED BY COURT
FRANCINE PICKETT, BRIAN COHEN, JACK MASIN, BELLE MASIN, individually and on Behalf of all other similarly situated, Respondents, LEONARD BEBCHICK, Respondent, JOSEPH HESS, LEONA HESS, TOM CRAGO, and LINDA CRAGO, Intervenors, v. HOLLAND AMERICA LINE-- WESTOURS, INC., Petitioner.
NO. 70300-1
SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON
35 P.3d 351; 2001 Wash. LEXIS 758
May 17, 2001, Argued
November 29, 2001, Filed
PRIOR HISTORY: [*1] Appeal from Superior Court, King County; 96-2-10831-6. Honorable Jay White, Judge.
PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Respondents class representatives sued petitioner cruise line to recover a portion of port charges charged to them in addition to cruise fares. Intervenor objecting class member objected to the proposed settlement that was approved by the trial court. The Washington Court of Appeals reversed the approval of the proposed settlement. The cruise line appealed.
OVERVIEW: The class representatives sued the cruise line for consumer protection violations and other claims. The trial court conditionally certified the class for the settlement. One member of the class objected to the trial court's approval of the settlement. The state supreme court held that the appellate court erred by focusing on the initial denial of class certification rather than determining if the settlement was fair, adequate, and reasonable. The factors used to make that determination include: plaintiffs' likelihood of success; the amount of discovery; the settlement terms; recommendation and experience of counsel; future expense and duration of litigation; recommendation of neutral parties; number of objectors and nature of objections; and the presence of good faith and the absence of collusion. The court considered that there was only one objection to the settlement out of a class of 450,000, the class was facing great uncertainty if the settlement was not approved, the travel vouchers received in the settlement were redeemable if not used, the parties were represented by good counsel, and the presence of good faith to hold the settlement was fair, adequate, and reasonable. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, members of the class were to receive fully transferable travel vouchers, redeemable for future Holland cruises. They are valid for three years from the date of issuance. The voucher amounts vary, depending upon the length of the original cruise and the date of its departure. The amounts are as follows:
Years of Departure Duration of Cruise Voucher Amount: 1992-94: Under 14 Days = $10.00; 14-21 Days = $15.00; Over 21 Days = $20.00; 1995-96: Under 14 Days = $25.00; 14-21 Days = $37.50; Over 21 Days = $50.00. The principal restriction on use of the vouchers is that they must be used for a booking made within 45 days of departure.
OUTCOME: The Court of Appeals was reversed the class settlement was determined to be fair, adequate, and reasonable
