In a new column for the American Psychological Association's Judicial Notebook, Professors Jennifer Robbennolt, Lesley Wexler, and Jennifer Pahre consider what psychology can tell us about whether cy-près settlements in class-action lawsuits are fair to the victims. The authors, writing about the case Frank v. Gaos, say:
"...The questions raised by cy-près awards could be informed by social scientific work that has explored the range of interests that motivate plaintiffs in civil litigation. These motivating interests include financial compensation, but also such considerations as obtaining information, telling their story, confirmation by the court of a relevant rule and its violation, and behavioral or institutional change that will prevent future harm.
In considering whether cy-près relief is appropriate, then, one might consider how the proposed cy-près remedy fulfills one or more of these goals."
Read the full column at apa.org.