UPDATE: On July 7, 2008, the Court denied Dynegy's motion to provide a second notice to the Class (this issue is described below). As a result, the settlement payments should be made in the very near future. The Court's order is at the top of the "Related Links" to the right.
On April 15, 2008, Dynegy's counsel informed us that Vanguard committed an error when it generated the class list for purposes of notifying class members of the settlement of this case. According to Vanguard, when it completed the process of determining the amount that each class member would receive in the settlement, it discovered that the list of class members it provided to Dynegy and class counsel last summer for class notice did not include the names and addresses of 534 class members. As a result, those 534 individuals were not mailed a notice of the settlement.
After realizing that an error had occurred, Dynegy and we requested and attended a telephone hearing with Judge Werlein to notify the court of the problem and discuss possible solutions. During the hearing, Judge Werlein requested a short statement from each side explaining their position with respect to issuing a supplemental class notice. Each side submitted their briefs on May 5, 2008.
In its filings, Dynegy asked the court to re-issue notice and hold another fairness hearing. We opposed Dynegy's motion and requested the court to order Vanguard to proceed with the distribution of the settlement proceeds. Links to the documents filed with the court, as well as the order issued by the judge after the telephone hearing, are available on this web page. Currently, we are awaiting the judge's decision.
We will post updated information here as soon as we hear from the judge. |
Court's Order Denying Dynegy's Motion to Require a Second Notice
Dynegy's Notice to Court of Vanguard's Error
Court's Order Requesting Briefing
Dynegy's Motion to Provide a Second Notice and Require a Second Approval Hearing
Declaration of Vanguard (Michael J. Granger)
Exhibit A to Dynegy's Motion
Exhibit B to Dynegy's Motion
The Class's Opposition to Requiring a Second Notice and Motion for Distribution
Exhibits 1-4 to Class's Opposition
The Class's Request for Time to Confer with Dynegy Should the Court Order a Second Notice
Exhibit to Class's Request to Confer
|
