Opinion ID: 735522
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Jacksons

Text: 28 MacDaniel Jackson, a former Dallas employee of PSI, invested $300,000 in partnerships. In November 1994, Jackson and his wife moved to North Carolina. Mr. Jackson advised PSI of his address change orally and in writing. On January 12, 1995, Mr. Jackson filed an arbitration proceeding regarding both his investment in partnerships as well as the loss of $100,000 in life insurance policies that allegedly had been churned by Prudential Insurance. 29 PSI sent notice of the class action to Mr. Jackson in care of PSI's Dallas office. A employee in PSI's Dallas office stated by affidavit that it was his common practice to forward mail to Mr. Jackson the day it was received or the next day, and that he had not withheld forwarding the class notice. Mr. Jackson's affidavit indicates that he did not receive the forwarded notice until December 7, 1995. On or about the same date, the Jacksons' counsel received a letter from PSI demanding that the Jacksons dismiss their arbitration proceeding. 30 The Jacksons moved to be excluded from the class in order to proceed with their individual arbitration claim, arguing that PSI's failure to provide the claims administrator with the proper address constituted sufficient grounds for extraordinary relief. 31 At the January 18 hearing, the district court denied the Jacksons' motion, noting that I almost had the impression ... that [Mr. Jackson] maybe caught himself after this thing after sitting on his duff after delaying letting you know about it before. 32 As the movants, the Jacksons had the burden of proof as to excusable neglect. The district court has evidently inferred from the affidavit of the PSI employee in Dallas that timely notice was sent, and has expressed skepticism concerning Jackson's claim that he did not receive notice until the deadline had expired. There has been no abuse of discretion.