Non-Settling Defendants Say They Deserve to Be Heard in Local TV Ad MDL

Non-settling defendants in the long-running Local TV Advertising Antitrust Litigation (MDL No. 2867) moved the court to reconsider, vacate and/or stay orders on preliminary approval of settlements and notice, in a Wednesday filing (docket 1:18-cv-06785) in U.S. District Court for Northern Illinois in Chicago. They also moved the court for an order staying dissemination of notice to the settlement classes until the court has given non-settling defendants a chance to be heard on plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary approval of the proposed settlements. CBS, Fox, Cox Media and ShareBuilders agreed in May to a $48 million settlement with advertisers in the lawsuit stemming from a 2018 DOJ investigation of ad price collusion that arose during inquiries into the failed Sinclair/Tribune deal (see 2305300073). The non-settling defendants -- Tegna, Griffin Communications, Meredith, Sinclair, Gray Media, E.W. Scripps, Nexstar Media and Tribune Broadcasting -- don’t oppose the “substance” of the partial settlements; they oppose certain aspects of the proposed notice process, recipients of the proposed notice and the content of the notices. The process didn't involve "the level of scrutiny required by the Federal Rules and did not permit affected parties, including Non-Settling Defendants, to raise with the Court their objections to the settlement class definition and notice plan that would cause them harm,” it said. The notice order should be vacated and the proposed notice amended to clarify that non-settling defendants “have not been adjudged to have participated in an antitrust conspiracy,” it said. The court should stay preliminary approval proceedings and dissemination of notice until after briefing and a hearing on plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary approval of the four proposed settlements, it said. In a separate filing, Tegna, Raycom (now Gray Media) and Meredith moved the court to reconsider and vacate the portion of its order that compels them to turn over their customer contact information to plaintiffs’ counsel “without any restriction or limitation on its use.”