The U.S. Supreme Court case Robert J. Devlin v. Robert A. Scardelletti et al., 2001, centered around the issue of whether a nonnamed class member could appeal a district court's approval of a settlement in a class action lawsuit without first intervening in the proceedings below as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a). The petitioner, Robert J. Devlin, was part of an employee union that had agreed to alter its pension plan through a settlement agreement approved by the District Court but objected to this decision and appealed it directly without having intervened at trial level. In their ruling, the Supreme Court held that nonnamed class members who object in timely manner to approval of settlements at fairness hearings have power to bring an appeal without needing formal intervention under Rule 24(a). This decision expanded rights for individuals within larger groups or classes involved in legal actions and clarified procedural rules regarding appeals.

In the dissenting opinion for Devlin v. Scardelletti, Justice Thomas, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia and Kennedy, argued that nonnamed class members should not be allowed to appeal a court-approved settlement. The dissenters contended that this right should only extend to named parties who have legal control over the litigation process. They believed allowing nonnamed members to appeal could disrupt the finality of settlements and create unnecessary complications in class action lawsuits. Furthermore, they pointed out that such individuals already have mechanisms available for voicing their objections - through written submissions or speaking at fairness hearings - without needing direct access to appeals courts.