## Facts

- An Amtrak passenger train derailed in Philadelphia on May 12, 2015, causing multiple deaths and widespread injuries.
- Numerous passengers and estates filed wrongful-death and personal-injury actions seeking compensatory damages against Amtrak in federal courts.
- The cases were centralized for coordinated pretrial proceedings in a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) under 28 U.S.C. § 1407.
- Amtrak admitted liability for compensatory damages but asserted that an aggregate statutory cap limited total recoverable damages for the incident to $295 million.
- Named plaintiffs Mark and Nicola Tulk moved to preliminarily certify a non-opt-out “limited fund” settlement class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1)(B), contending the statutory cap created a finite fund that could be depleted by early settlements or judgments.
- Many other plaintiffs opposed mandatory class treatment, preferring to proceed as individual claimants within the MDL.

## Issues

1. Whether an aggregate statutory liability cap, standing alone, establishes a “limited fund” justifying a mandatory class under Rule 23(b)(1)(B).
2. Whether the MDL’s coordinated management tools adequately protect claimants from inequitable depletion of a capped recovery pool without imposing a non-opt-out class.
3. Whether preliminary certification of a settlement class is proper before a concrete settlement and allocation plan is presented.

## Decision

- The court denied the motion for preliminary certification of a mandatory Rule 23(b)(1)(B) settlement class.
- The court held the proposed class failed to satisfy the strict limited-fund criteria required for non-opt-out certification.
- The court concluded that the MDL framework could manage coordination, sequencing, and settlement supervision without depriving plaintiffs of individual control.
- The court found the request premature because no concrete settlement structure or allocation methodology was presented to permit meaningful Rule 23 analysis.

## Legal Principles

- Rule 23(b)(1)(B) limited-fund certification is exceptional and is subject to rigorous scrutiny because it binds absent claimants without opt-out rights.
- Under the limited-fund framework, a proponent must show a finite, inadequate fund; a clear dedication of the fund to the class claims; and an equitable allocation mechanism among similarly situated claimants.
- A statutory aggregate cap on liability does not automatically convert mass-tort litigation into a certifiable limited-fund class.
- Courts may deny mandatory settlement-class certification where MDL coordination provides workable alternatives to manage the risk of inconsistent outcomes and to supervise aggregate resolutions.
- Settlement-class certification generally requires enough settlement specificity (including allocation protections and conflict management) to evaluate Rule 23(a) adequacy and fairness considerations.

## Conclusion

The court refused to impose a non-opt-out limited-fund settlement class based solely on Amtrak’s statutory liability cap, emphasizing that strict Rule 23(b)(1)(B) requirements were not met and that MDL coordination could address fund-allocation concerns without binding unwilling claimants to an undefined future settlement.


In re Amtrak Train Derailment in Philadelphia, Pa. on May 12, 2015, No. 15-3785, 2016 WL 1359725 (E.D. Pa. Apr. 5, 2016)