Landucci v. Freeman Expositions, LLC
Filing
98
ORDER regarding error in calculating median as reported in 95 Post-Distribution Accounting and 97 Joint Statement. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero on January 17, 2023. (jcslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2023)
Case 3:19-cv-07573-JCS Document 98 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
TERESA LANDUCCI,
Plaintiff,
8
FREEMAN EXPOSITIONS, LLC, et al.,
Re: Dkt. No. 97
Defendants.
11
United States District Court
Northern District of California
ORDER REGARDING ERROR IN
CALCULATING MEDIAN
v.
9
10
Case No. 19-cv-07573-JCS
12
13
The Court previously ordered the parties to further explain the settlement administrator’s
14
calculation of a $39.99 mean payment to class members and a $218.00 median payment to class
15
members. See dkt. 96.
In a joint statement filed in response to that order, the parties report that each Rule 23
16
17
settlement class member received a fixed payment of $218.00, each PAGA beneficiary received a
18
fixed payment of $3.38, and individuals who were members of both groups therefore received
19
$221.38. Joint Statement (dkt. 97) at 2. The parties explain that in calculating the mean, “the
20
administrator took the total amount of payments and divided that amount by the total number of
21
individuals receiving payments,” id., which is a procedurally sound method of determining that
22
value.
23
As for the median, however, the parties report that “[s]ince there were only three payment
24
amounts ($3.38, $218.00, and $221.38), the median payment was $218.00.” Id. That explanation
25
reflects a misunderstanding of the nature of a median. The parties are correct that the “[m]edian
26
refers to the midpoint of payments,” id., but it refers to the midpoint of the set of all payments, not
27
of the three unique values in that set. See Oxford English Dictionary, “Median,”
28
https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/115646, (definition 3, pertaining to statistics: “A quantity, term,
Case 3:19-cv-07573-JCS Document 98 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 2
1
or value that is the midpoint of a set of values, such that the variable has an equal probability of
2
falling above or below it; the middle term of a discrete series arranged in order of magnitude (or, if
3
there is no middle term, the mean of the middle two terms)”). Since more than half of the
4
payments in this case were for $3.38, if all payments were listed in order of magnitude, the
5
payment at the midpoint would be for $3.38, which is the median. See generally James T.
6
McClave et al., Statistics for Business and Economics 65–67 (14th ed. 2022) (providing a sample
7
calculation where a dataset includes two identical values, which are listed separately).
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
13
14
Because the true value of the median is apparent from the record, no further filings are
necessary to correct this error. The settlement administrator and counsel for both parties are
admonished to be mindful of this issue in future cases.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 17, 2023
______________________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
Chief Magistrate
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?