Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2243032
 
 

Footnotes (144)



 


 



Disaggregative Mechanisms: The New Frontier of Mass-Claims Resolution Without Class Actions


Jaime Dodge


University of Georgia

April 1, 2013

UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2013-4

Abstract:     
Aggregation has long been viewed as the primary if not sole vehicle for mass claims resolution. For a half-century, scholars have consistently viewed the consolidated litigation of similar claims through joinder, class actions and more recently multi-district litigation as the only mechanism for efficiently resolving mass claims. In this Article, I challenge that long-standing and fundamental conception. The Article seeks to reconceptualize our understanding of mass claims resolution, arguing that we are witnessing the birth of a second, unexplored branch of mass claims resolution mechanisms — which I term “disaggregative” dispute resolution systems because they lack the traditional aggregation of common questions that has been the hallmark of traditional mass claims litigation. Disaggregation returns to a focus on the individual akin to that of the single-plaintiff system, but uses either procedural or substantive streamlining, or a shift of costs to the defendant, to correct the asymmetries that prompted the creation of class actions. Many of our most innovative claims structures — from the BP GCCF and the fund created in the wake of the Costa Concordia disaster, to the common single-plaintiff arbitration clauses in consumer and employment agreements — use this new, bottom-up model of disaggregative mass claims resolution instead of the familiar top-down aggregative model.

These next-generation systems have been heralded as a significant advancement in mass claims resolution, capable of awarding more compensation to claimants more quickly and at lower cost than aggregate litigation. But like the single-plaintiff and aggregate litigation systems that preceded it, disaggregation has its flaws. Because the defendant typically designs these systems, they often give rise to questions about legitimacy and the accuracy of compensation. More shockingly, situating disaggregation within the existing doctrinal trends reveals that the rise of disaggregation allows corporations to avoid class actions in a far broader swath of cases than has previously been identified — such that class actions will, as a practical matter, proceed only at the defendant’s election, raising substantial questions about the viability of private actions as a mechanism for the enforcement of law. Yet, because these systems are the product of contract, attempts to restrict these systems have largely failed. The answer to these problems lies in an unlikely and potentially controversial approach: expanding rather than restricting the availability of disaggregation, by creating a public mechanism for disaggregation — comparable to the existing public aggregation mechanisms.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 59

Keywords: class action, multi-district litigation, tort law, aggregation, arbitration, resolution, mass tort litigation, BP Fund, Deepwater Horizon, Costa Concordia, non-Article IIII courts

JEL Classification: K13

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: April 2, 2013 ; Last revised: May 31, 2013

Suggested Citation

Dodge, Jaime, Disaggregative Mechanisms: The New Frontier of Mass-Claims Resolution Without Class Actions (April 1, 2013). UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2013-4. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2243032

Contact Information

Jaime Dodge (Contact Author)
University of Georgia ( email )
Athens, GA 30602
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 520
Downloads: 118
Download Rank: 137,899
Footnotes:  144

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.437 seconds