Identity Crisis: Class Certification, Aggregate Proof, and How Rule 23 May Be Self-Defeating the Policy for Which It Was Established
Jeremy Britton Whitbeck
affiliation not provided to SSRN
March 23, 2011
Pace Law Review, Vol. 32, No. 2, 2012
Class actions suits developed in the United States as a form of “group litigation,” an alternative to the impracticability or inequities of separate, individual actions of similarly situated class of plaintiffs and, eventually, defendants as well. Congressional passage of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 provided the federal courts with expounded diversity jurisdiction for the purpose of “assur[ing] fairer outcomes for class members and defendants.” However, recent circuit splits regarding class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the use of aggregate proof in certifying classes, may whereby, in an ironic twist of legal fate, result in the very same “inconsistent or varying” standards that the rule was designed to prevent.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: Class Action, Aggregate Proof, CAFA, Class Action Fairness Act, Dukes v. Wal-MartAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: March 28, 2011 ; Last revised: November 21, 2012
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo3 in 1.621 seconds