EAST PALESTINE — The five residents appealing the East Palestine train derailment class action settlement were a day late and $850,000 short, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled on Wednesday.

The appellate court in Cincinnati dismissed appeals filed by attorney David Graham on behalf of Zsuzsa Troyan, Tamara Freeze, Sharon Lynch, Joseph Sheely and Carly Tunno, citing jurisdictional issues and failure to pay the appeal bond.

“A set of objectors to a class-action settlement are over eight months late in paying an $850,000 appeal bond. Instead of paying up, they moved to extend the time to appeal the bond order — one day late,” Wednesday’s ruling by a three-judge panel read. “Because they’re a day late, we can’t hear their reasons for being $850,000 short. We dismiss their appeal of the motion to extend for lack of jurisdiction, and we dismiss their appeals of the settlement for failure to pay the bond.”

In September 2024, the district court approved a $600 million settlement to compensate approximately 55,000 claimants for damages, including emotional distress, medical monitoring, and business losses. The five objectors to the settlement filed appeals almost immediately but failed to post the required $850,000 appeal bond which was ordered by federal Judge Benita Pearson on Jan. 16, 2024 and was to be paid by the end of that month. The bond was intended to cover administrative costs and taxable expenses caused by delays in distributing the settlement funds.

The objectors also missed the March 20 deadline to request an extension to appeal the bond order, filing their motion one day late with Pearson who later ruled that procedure rule was not followed and the same rule does not allow for any additional time.

Graham had argued that the bond was too steep and was essentially a “road block” for his clients who were financially strapped before the derailment and more so after it. He had asked the Sixth Circuit to reduce or eliminate the bid completely and to extend the appeal deadline.

The Sixth Circuit ruled that the district court lacked jurisdiction to grant the untimely motion or reduce the bond, and ultimately the Court of Appeals dismissed the objectors’ appeals of the settlement due to their failure to pay that bond, emphasizing the prejudice caused by delays in distributing funds to affected residents and businesses.

“It doesn’t matter whether the motion to extend was one day, one hour, or one minute late. When the 30 days ended, the district court lost jurisdiction over the objectors’ motion to extend their time to appeal the bond order,” the Sixth Circuit wrote. “… the parties are prejudiced by the delay in distributing the settlement, the objectors have offered no valid justification for failing to pay the appeal bond, and the objectors are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claims. So we dismiss the objectors’ appeals of the settlement for failure to pay the bond.”

The court noted that the settlement process was thorough, involving extensive discovery, mediation, and negotiations. It also highlighted the overwhelming support for the settlement among class members, with less than 0.01% filing objections.

The decision effectively ends the objectors’ challenges, allowing direct payments of up to $70,000 per household for property damages to be distributed. It’s unclear when the direct payments will be paid out as Epiq, the firm which replaced Kroll as settlement administrator, is still auditing alleged mistakes made by Kroll when paying out personal injury claims.