Pella Class Action Lawsuit: Defect, Settlements, and Payouts

The Pella class action lawsuit, Eubank, et al. v. Pella Corporation, accused Pella of selling ProLine aluminum-clad wood windows that let water seep behind the cladding and rot the wood underneath, out of sight, until damage was severe. Filed in 2006, the case dragged on for more than a decade after a first $90 million settlement was thrown out by the Seventh Circuit in 2014. A replacement legal team eventually secured a $25.75 million settlement fund, which received final approval on March 15, 2019, with checks going out to roughly 10,000 claimants that September.

The Defect Behind the Case

Pella’s ProLine aluminum-clad wood casement, awning, and transom windows, including the 250 and 450 Series, were manufactured between 1991 and 2009. The lawsuit alleged a design flaw that allowed water to get behind the aluminum cladding meant to protect the wood. Because the metal covered the wood, homeowners often didn’t know anything was wrong until the rot had spread, sometimes into frames, drywall, and the surrounding structure.¹

Homeowners reported paying thousands of dollars for repairs and replacements. The complaint alleged that Pella tried surface fixes with sealants that didn’t address the design problem, and that the company denied warranty claims by blaming installation or interior humidity.¹

Who Was in the Class

The settlement class was defined as all current or former owners in the United States of homes or other structures containing Pella ProLine aluminum-clad wood casement, awning, or transom windows, including the 250 and 450 Series, manufactured between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 2009.²

Other Pella product lines were not covered. Architect Series and Designer Series windows became the subject of a separate multidistrict litigation before Judge David C. Norton in the District of South Carolina, and any water-infiltration claims involving those products fall outside the Eubank settlement.³

What Homeowners Could Recover

Pella agreed to fund a $25.75 million settlement split into two pools. Fund A, at $23.75 million, covered claims filed during the primary claims period along with service awards and administrative costs. Fund B, at $2 million, was set aside for homeowners who discovered eligible damage after the initial filing deadline.⁴

Payment turned on how quickly the damage appeared. Homeowners whose damage was discovered within 15 years of purchase were eligible for full reimbursement of costs for new windows, installation, finish, and repairs. Those whose damage appeared 15 or more years after installation could recover 25 percent of that amount.⁵

Claims had to be submitted by mail on paper forms, postmarked by June 20, 2018. Online and phone filings were not accepted. KCC Class Action Services administered the claims.⁴

Why the First Settlement Was Thrown Out

The 2019 outcome only exists because an earlier deal collapsed. In the fall of 2011, the original class counsel and Pella negotiated a settlement nominally valued at $90 million, and U.S. District Judge James B. Zagel approved it in May 2013, along with $11 million in attorneys’ fees.⁶

On June 2, 2014, the Seventh Circuit reversed. Writing for the panel, Judge Richard Posner said “class counsel sold out the class” and called the deal “inequitable — even scandalous.”⁷

The court identified several problems. Lead class counsel Paul M. Weiss was the son-in-law of lead class representative Leonard Saltzman, a “grave conflict of interest” for someone supposed to act as a fiduciary for the whole class. Claim forms ran 12 to 13 pages and required homeowners to find ID numbers stamped on the windows themselves, sometimes only accessible by removing a window. Of more than 225,000 class members, just 1,276 had filed claims by February 2013, seeking about $1 million combined.⁸

The notice was also misleading. It implied that $750 and $6,000 figures were guaranteed payments when they were actually ceilings, and reaching them required arbitration.⁹ The $11 million fee was guaranteed while class recovery was contingent, and any fee reduction would revert to Pella rather than the class.¹⁰ When four original named plaintiffs objected, Weiss replaced them with cooperative substitutes.⁷

The Seventh Circuit ordered Saltzman removed as class representative, Weiss and his firm replaced as class counsel, and the four displaced named plaintiffs reinstated.⁷ Posner credited the objectors, noting that “without them there would have been no appellate challenge to the settlement.” Attorney Ted Frank of the Center for Class Action Fairness, who represented objector Michael Schulz, was central to the appeal.¹¹

The Final Settlement and Payouts

In September 2014, Judge Zagel appointed Robert A. Clifford of Clifford Law Offices and George K. Lang as replacement lead counsel, specifically excluding two firms tied to the rejected deal.¹² The re-captioned Eubank case received preliminary approval of a revised settlement in February 2018 before U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman.¹³

Judge Coleman granted final approval on March 15, 2019. Total cost to Pella exceeded $34 million once attorneys’ fees and administration were included, with about $25.7 million earmarked for roughly 10,000 eligible claimants.⁶

From a $9 million fee pool, Clifford’s team received approximately $7.6 million. Objector attorneys received $1.25 million combined: $966,750 to Ted Frank and $280,000 to John Pentz. The Complex Litigation Group, involved in the earlier failed settlement, asked for $3.4 million and was denied any share, with Judge Coleman citing the firm’s conduct in the prior proceedings.⁶ Settlement checks were mailed as of September 25, 2019.²

What This Means for New Pella Complaints

The Eubank claims deadlines are long past. For products purchased on or after February 10, 2017, Pella’s purchase terms include a binding arbitration clause and a class action waiver, sending disputes to the American Arbitration Association rather than court. Buyers have a 90-day window to opt out after purchase, and small claims court remains available.¹⁴

1
ClassAction.org. Pella Windows
2
Pella Window Settlement. Eubank v. Pella Corporation Settlement
3
U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. MDL-2514 Initial Transfer Order
4
Pella Window Settlement. Frequently Asked Questions
5
Top Class Actions. Pella Reaches $26M Window Defect Class Action Settlement
6
Legal Newsline. Judge OKs $35M Pella Windows Class Action Deal
7
FindLaw. Saltzman v. Pella Corporation
8
Courthouse News Service. Pella Window Settlement Tossed Out As Unfair
9
Class Actions Insider. Class Action Settlement in Pella Windows Case Overturned by Seventh Circuit
10
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Eubank v. Pella Corporation, Nos. 13-2091 et al.
11
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on the Judiciary. Ted Frank Testimony
12
Law360. Clifford Law Offices Tapped to Lead Pella Window Fight
13
Clifford Law Offices. Pella Windows
14
Pella Corporation. Online Purchase Terms and Conditions