Despite my best intentions, I have not been posting here as often as I would like in the past few months. But that does not mean that I have not been reading. So, in lieu of a long-winded analysis of some new tactic, trend, or article, please accept the following capsule reviews of three of the more interesting and practical class action articles from the last few months:
Rule 23(b)(1) is the forgotten stepchild in Rule 23 jurisprudence. Rule 23(b)(3) gets attention because it’s where the money is. Rule 23(b)(2) is essential to civil rights groups seeking injunctions, and drew attention from plaintiffs’ lawyers seeking an end-run around what they viewed as Rule 23(b)(3)’s more stringent requirements. But case law on Rule 23(b)(1)(A) (which allows class actions to prohibit inconsistent adjudications) and (b)(1)(2) has been notably sparse.
Which is why many lawyers might not have caught one of the strange developments in the wake of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dukes. As Dean Robert Klonoff–author of, among … Continue Reading
A few weeks ago, I received a copy of the Fourth Edition of Class Actions & Other Multi-Party Litigation in a Nutshell in the mail. Since this is one of the "go-to" references for many practitioners, it seems worth discussion whether it’s worth the investment to pick up the new edition.
A few disclaimers before I start. I received this copy without paying for it, presumably so I would review it. Dean Robert Klonoff was kind enough to provide a nice blurb for the first edition of the Class Action Playbook. (That said, it hasn’t stopped me from disagreeing … Continue Reading
The tactic is more common that one might imagine: when plaintiffs file their motion for certification, they may include an expert report from a noted law professor, testifying that their case is ideally suited for certification under Rule 23. Now, on one side of the certification debate, you have practicing lawyers zealously representing their client, and on the other, a ostensibly neutral expert in civil procedure. How can a defendant effectively oppose a motion like this?
By excluding the expert, which is easier than it first appears. Take the case of Walsh v. Principal Life Insurance Co., 266 F.R.D. … Continue Reading