Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2220452
 
 

Footnotes (373)



 


 



The History of the Modern Class Action, Part I: Sturm Und Drang, 1953-1980


David Marcus


University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law

February 15, 2013

Washington University Law Review, Vol. 90, 2013
Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 13-11

Abstract:     
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent and intensive engagement with class action doctrine has changed the device for claim aggregation significantly. The first era in the history of the modern class action, which began with the revision of Rule 23 in the 1950s and 1960s, may be ending. If so, the class action’s remarkable story deserves telling. This Article provides the first chapter, explaining how class action doctrine coalesced just moments before the great social and political strife of the 1960s, provoked a heated political war within a couple of years of its emergence, and finally stabilized by the end of the 1970s.

After telling the story of the revised Rule 23’s origins, I describe the emergence of the fiery class action politics of the late 1960s and early 1970s. Combatants clashed over two competing conceptions of the new device. Advocates for plaintiffs’ interests championed a “regulatory conception” of Rule 23: Courts and lawmakers, they insisted, should treat the class action as a mechanism designed to boost the regulatory force of the substantive law. Decision-makers should apply Rule 23 flexibly, to recognize that the class action played a key role in new regulatory strategies pursued in the 1970s. Corporate interests and their allies countered with an “adjectival conception” of the class action, or an understanding of the device that conceived of it as a joinder rule like any other. They argued that courts should limit the class action strictly, lest a mere procedural rule significantly distort the role that civil litigation properly played in American government.

The clash between these conceptions of Rule 23 offers a way to understand doctrinal evolution during the first chapter of the device’s modern history. Congress and federal rulemakers were unable to resolve the conflict between the regulatory and adjectival conceptions. The federal courts, however, did so successfully. Using a pragmatic balancing strategy in each substantive area affected by class actions, the federal courts preserved Rule 23’s regulatory force while insisting that class litigation not deviate too far from more traditional models of civil adjudication. This strategy stabilized class action doctrine by the end of the 1970s, laying a foundation for far more adventurous uses of the device in the 1980s and 1990s.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 65

Keywords: class action, history, Rule 23, class action doctrine

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 19, 2013  

Suggested Citation

Marcus, David, The History of the Modern Class Action, Part I: Sturm Und Drang, 1953-1980 (February 15, 2013). Washington University Law Review, Vol. 90, 2013; Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 13-11. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2220452

Contact Information

David Marcus (Contact Author)
University of Arizona - James E. Rogers College of Law ( email )
P.O. Box 210176
Tucson, AZ 85721-0176
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 650
Downloads: 218
Download Rank: 80,334
Footnotes:  373

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo8 in 0.235 seconds