Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Seventh Circuit Rejects the “Reasonable Indication” Approach For Class Member Opt-Outs

By Trent Taylor, Andrew Gann & Frank Talbott V on March 17, 2021
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Recently, in the Matter of Navistar MaxxForce Engines Mktg., Sales Practices, & Prod. Liab. Litig. (“Navistar”), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals was asked to adopt the “reasonable indication” approach, which would allow class members to opt out of a class based on any reasonable indication of their desire to exclude themselves.  Finding the application of such an approach to be impractical, the court refused to adopt it.

Navistar involved the settlement of a class action in which class members accused Navistar of selling trucks with defective engines.  Prior to approving the settlement, the district court required that all class members be notified via first-class mail, and outlined a detailed opt-out procedure should any class member wish to litigate independently.  Two class members, identified as “Drasc,” who had already filed a separate lawsuit against Navistar in Ohio state court, failed to follow these opt out procedures.  Once the settlement was approved, Navistar claimed the separate Ohio state lawsuit was now barred.  Drasc disagreed, arguing their efforts to continue litigating in state court should be deemed a “reasonable indication” of their desire to opt out of the class settlement.

In its analysis, the Seventh Circuit identified several reasons why implementing the “reasonable indication” standard would be untenable.  For example, without a clear bright-line approach, class members may try to have it both ways—i.e., litigate on their own, and if they lose, attempt to argue they are entitled to the class settlement.  In addition, the lack of a clear and mechanical rule would make class actions nearly impossible to administer, and instead, may require the district court to analyze whether the “reasonable indication” standard was met for hundreds, if not thousands, of class members.

Despite rejecting its application in this case, where opt-out instructions were provided by the district court in “excruciating detail,” the Seventh Circuit did acknowledge, however, that a district court may use the “reasonable indication” standard if the court has not issued either opt-out instructions, or if the instructions lack specificity.

This is a good reminder that class action litigators should ensure that clear, specific, and detailed opt-out procedures are provided to class members.   For Courts following Navistar, including those in the Seventh Circuit, this will foreclose lawsuits brought by class members who fail to follow those opt-out procedures.

Photo of Trent Taylor Trent Taylor

Trent, co-leader of McGuireWoods’ Food & Beverage Industry Team, focuses on defending complex class actions with an emphasis on product liability matters, public and private nuisance litigation, environmental contamination suits, and food, cosmetic, and supplement labeling (including CBD) and safety issues.

Read more about Trent TaylorEmail
Photo of Andrew Gann Andrew Gann

Drew is a co-leader of McGuireWoods’ Crisis Management & Incident Response Practice Group. He represents companies in class actions, mass torts, and high-stakes commercial litigation—particularly when regulatory scrutiny, reputational risk, and catastrophic loss converge. He brings deep experience guiding clients through multidistrict litigation…

Drew is a co-leader of McGuireWoods’ Crisis Management & Incident Response Practice Group. He represents companies in class actions, mass torts, and high-stakes commercial litigation—particularly when regulatory scrutiny, reputational risk, and catastrophic loss converge. He brings deep experience guiding clients through multidistrict litigation, punitive damages exposure, and investigations by federal and state regulators, including the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), public utility commissions, and state attorneys general.

Read more about Andrew GannEmail
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Business and Commercial, Class Action & Mass Torts
  • Blog:
    Class Action Countermeasures
  • Organization:
    McGuireWoods LLP

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo