$332M Settlement Finalized in Colgate-Palmolive ERISA Retirement Benefits Dispute
Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
Case Reference: McCutcheon et al. v. Colgate-Palmolive Co. et al., 1:16-cv-04170
Represented by: Bredhoff & Kaiser, P.L.L.C., Gottesdiener Law Firm, P.L.L.C.
A New York federal judge has granted preliminary approval to a $332 million class action settlement resolving long-running claims that Colgate-Palmolive improperly calculated lump-sum pension payments for retirees in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The lawsuit, filed in 2016 by retired employee Rebecca McCutcheon, alleged that Colgate’s pension plan amendments caused retirees and surviving spouses who elected lump-sum payouts between 1989 and 2005 to receive less than they were owed in retirement benefits. The dispute centered on the company’s methodology for calculating residual annuities tied to the pension plan. The settlement is expected to benefit roughly 1,200 retirees and spouses while also covering attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses, and administrative costs.
The retirees secured a significant win in 2020 when the district court granted partial summary judgment in their favor, finding that Colgate’s pension conversion calculations improperly undervalued lump-sum payments. The court estimated at the time that the class’s claims totaled approximately $300 million, and the Second Circuit later affirmed the ruling on appeal in 2023. After additional disputes regarding annuity calculation methods and a revised final judgment in 2024, the parties entered mediation following another appellate victory for the retirees in 2025. The case ultimately settled in June 2025 after mediation efforts in May, with the court later determining the proposed agreement was sufficiently fair and reasonable to proceed toward final approval.
$200M Settlement Reached in Generic Drug Price-Fixing Antitrust Litigation
Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Case Reference: In re Generic Pharmaceuticals Pricing Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2724
Represented by: NastLaw LLC
Sun Pharmaceutical Industries and its subsidiary Taro Pharmaceutical have agreed to pay $200 million to settle claims brought by end purchasers in the sprawling multidistrict litigation accusing generic drugmakers of conspiring to inflate the prices of generic medicines across the United States. The settlement, reached without any admission of wrongdoing, would resolve all claims against Sun, Taro, and affiliated parties related to allegations that the companies participated in an industry-wide scheme to fix prices and allocate markets beginning in 2012. The agreement remains subject to court approval and may be reduced if a significant percentage of class members opt out of the settlement.
The Pennsylvania multidistrict litigation consolidates more than 20 lawsuits first filed in 2016 and now involves allegations tied to at least 18 generic drugs, along with claims brought by dozens of states, employers, and end purchasers. Prosecutors and plaintiffs have described the matter as one of the largest pharmaceutical price-fixing conspiracies in U.S. history, with Connecticut officials previously calling it the “largest cartel case in the history of the United States.” Sun and Taro had already paid tens of millions in prior settlements related to the litigation, while Taro separately agreed in 2020 to pay $419 million to resolve criminal allegations with the U.S. Department of Justice. Numerous other manufacturers, including Sandoz, Apotex, and Glenmark, have since entered their own settlements as the litigation continues to expand.
$30M Settlement Finalized in YouTube Children’s Privacy Class Action
Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Case Reference: C.H. et al. v. Google LLC and YouTube LLC, 5:19-cv-07016
Represented by: Silver Golub & Teitell LLP, Pritzker Levine LLP
A federal judge in California has granted final approval to a $30 million class action settlement resolving claims that Google and YouTube unlawfully collected children’s personal data while minors watched videos on the platform. The lawsuit, originally filed in 2019 by parents and guardians, alleged that Google violated children’s privacy rights by tracking users under 13 through data such as IP addresses, device identifiers, and geolocation information without parental consent. Plaintiffs claimed the company used that information to improve targeted advertising tied to child-directed YouTube content, including videos featuring cartoons, nursery rhymes, and toy-related programming designed to attract young viewers.
The settlement class includes children under the age of 13 in the United States who watched allegedly child-directed YouTube content between July 1, 2013 and April 1, 2020. U.S. Magistrate Judge Susan van Keulen approved the agreement after finding it resulted from extensive arm’s-length negotiations and mediation efforts following more than six years of litigation. The court reserved $9 million from the settlement fund for attorneys’ fees and approved service awards for representative guardians involved in the case. Plaintiffs’ counsel estimated that roughly 1 million valid claims could be submitted, with eligible class members potentially receiving between $20 and $30 after fees and costs. Despite concerns raised about fraudulent claims submissions, both parties told the court that the claims administrator had implemented verification measures and fraud-detection tools to monitor the process.
Conclusion
These high-profile settlements underscore the continued influence of class action litigation in addressing alleged corporate misconduct across a wide range of industries, including pharmaceuticals, technology, and employee benefits. From claims involving underpaid pension benefits and alleged antitrust violations in the generic drug market to accusations of unlawful data collection targeting children, each case reflects the growing scrutiny companies face over business practices that may affect large groups of consumers, retirees, and families. As courts continue to approve and oversee substantial settlements in these complex disputes, the outcomes highlight the significant role class actions play in shaping corporate accountability, consumer protection, and compliance with federal laws such as ERISA, antitrust statutes, and privacy regulations.
For insight into 2025's most significant class action cases, see our Top Class Action Settlements of 2025.
