Facts
- Inmates housed at the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center (the jail) filed a class-action lawsuit against the City of Albuquerque (the city).
- The inmates alleged that the conditions of confinement at the jail were unlawful.
- After the lawsuit was filed, the inmates and the city negotiated a stipulated settlement agreement intended to resolve the jail-conditions claims on a class-wide basis.
- The parties submitted the stipulated settlement agreement to the court for review and approval as a class settlement.
Issues
- Whether the court should approve the parties’ stipulated settlement agreement resolving the inmates’ class-action claims challenging conditions at the jail.
Decision
- The court reviewed the stipulated settlement agreement as a proposed class-action settlement.
- The court approved the stipulated settlement agreement.
Legal Principles
- In a class action, any settlement that would bind absent class members requires court approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e).
- When deciding whether to approve a class settlement, the court must determine whether the agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate for the class in light of the case’s claims, risks, and the relief obtained.
- A court’s approval of a stipulated settlement agreement gives the agreement binding effect on class members within the settlement’s scope, subject to the approval order’s terms.
Conclusion
McLendon v. City of Albuquerque involves inmates’ class-action challenge to allegedly unlawful jail conditions and the parties’ effort to resolve those claims through a stipulated settlement agreement; the court’s role was to review the proposed class settlement under Rule 23(e) and approve it, making the settlement binding according to its terms.