## Facts

- A certified class action by women students challenged alleged sex discrimination in Temple University’s intercollegiate athletics; the opinion addressed a dispute over defendants’ communications with class members and potential witnesses.
- Class counsel arranged meetings with women’s teams; some athletes asked coaches whether attendance was required.
- A women’s tennis coach told athletes they could meet with class counsel but that Temple’s attorneys had a right to be present, and he asked athletes to inform Temple when meetings were scheduled.
- After reports that coaching staff comments discouraged attendance, class counsel contacted Temple’s associate counsel, who proposed a memorandum to athletes about the lawsuit and the meetings.
- Temple distributed a memorandum, coordinated with its legal office, that portrayed cooperation with class counsel as disloyal, misstated or minimized the scope of the certified class, and suggested plaintiffs had limited legal support.
- Student-athletes testified that the memorandum and related comments made them reluctant to meet with plaintiffs’ counsel or speak about the case; the court found a chilling effect on cooperation and witness participation.

## Issues

1. Whether defendants and their counsel engaged in improper communications with represented class members and potential witnesses that interfered with the attorney-client relationship between the class and class counsel.
2. Whether remedial orders and sanctions were warranted, including corrective notice, restrictions on future communications, and monetary sanctions.

## Decision

- The court granted the motion in substantial part, finding defendants and their counsel engaged in improper and unethical communications with class members and potential witnesses.
- The court found the memorandum and related statements were misleading and intended to discourage class members from meeting and cooperating with class counsel.
- The court ordered a court-approved corrective notice to class members explaining their rights and correcting misleading impressions.
- The court prohibited further improper communications that misrepresented the litigation or discouraged consultation with class counsel.
- The court imposed monetary sanctions, including a substantial fine, against defendants and their counsel.

## Legal Principles

- In a certified class action, absent class members are treated as represented parties for purposes of restricting communications that may interfere with their relationship with class counsel.
- Courts have authority, including inherent powers and supervision under Rule 23, to police communications with class members to protect fair conduct and the integrity of the class action process.
- Communications to class members that misstate class status or rights, imply surveillance of counsel communications, or pressure loyalty to a defendant may be enjoined and corrected through court-approved notice.
- Monetary sanctions may be imposed where misleading communications risk litigation advantage and where counsel acts in bad faith or compounds known interference concerns.

## Conclusion

The court held that Temple and its counsel disseminated misleading, coercive communications that chilled class members’ cooperation with their attorneys, and it responded with corrective notice, restrictions on future contact, and substantial monetary sanctions to protect the class action process.


Haffer v. Temple Univ. of the Commonwealth Sys. of Higher Educ., 115 F.R.D. 506 (E.D. Pa. 1987)