Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Merging Roles: Mass Tort Lawyers As Agents And Trustees, Charles Silver
Merging Roles: Mass Tort Lawyers As Agents And Trustees, Charles Silver
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Charge Me, Pay Me, But Don't Even Think Of Litigating Me: The Dominance Of Arbitration In Truth-In-Lending Claims , M. Susan Hale
Charge Me, Pay Me, But Don't Even Think Of Litigating Me: The Dominance Of Arbitration In Truth-In-Lending Claims , M. Susan Hale
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
This article analyzes the impact of the courts' ever increasing priority to enforce arbitration agreements in Truth In Lending Act (TILA) claims and reform. Part I entails a general discussion of TILA's logistics; the goals, the means, and the remedies. Part II briefly traces the rise of arbitration as well as evaluating its various advantages and disadvantages. Part III reports on the current emphasis of enforcing arbitration agreements in federal courts by explaining the basis of enforcing the agreement. Part IV explores the impact of arbitrating TILA claims on the claim and on individuals. Part V provides an analysis of …
Why American Express V. Italian Colors Does Not Matter And Coordinated Pursuit Of Aggregate Claims May Be A Viable Option After Concepcion, Gregory C. Cook
Why American Express V. Italian Colors Does Not Matter And Coordinated Pursuit Of Aggregate Claims May Be A Viable Option After Concepcion, Gregory C. Cook
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
This Comment suggests that the upcoming decision by the Supreme Court in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant will not change the class action landscape. While the plaintiff bar contends that certain public policy goals will be lost as a result of American Express and AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, this Comment argues that, in the correct circumstances, coordinated individual arbitrations can address at least some of these public policy goals and plaintiff counsel should focus on such coordination efforts (including, for instance, ethically recruiting actually-injured plaintiffs, the use of common plaintiff counsel, the use of common experts, and …
Judges! Stop Deferring To Class-Action Lawyers, Brian Wolfman
Judges! Stop Deferring To Class-Action Lawyers, Brian Wolfman
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform Caveat
I represent a national non-profit consumer rights organization, as an amicus, in a federal appeal challenging a district court’s approval of a class-action settlement of claims under the federal Credit Repair Organization Act (CROA). My client maintains that the district court erred in finding that the settlement was “fair, reasonable, and adequate,” which is the standard for class-action settlement approval under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. In particular, we argue that the district court committed a reversible legal error when it deferred to the class-action lawyers’ recommendation to approve the settlement because, in those lawyers’ view, it was fair, …
Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer
Class Actions, Heightened Commonality, And Declining Access To Justice, A. Benjamin Spencer
A. Benjamin Spencer
A prerequisite to being certified as a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is that there are “questions of law or fact common to the class.” Although this “commonality” requirement had heretofore been regarded as something that was easily satisfied, in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes the Supreme Court gave it new vitality by reading into it an obligation to identify among the class a common injury and common questions that are “central” to the dispute. Not only is such a reading of Rule 23’s commonality requirement unsupported by the text of the rule, but …
Like Moths To A Flame - International Securities Litigation After Morrison: Correcting The Supreme Court's Transactional Test, Marco Ventoruzzo
Like Moths To A Flame - International Securities Litigation After Morrison: Correcting The Supreme Court's Transactional Test, Marco Ventoruzzo
Journal Articles
Because of the broad jurisdiction American courts have asserted in cases arising under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, they have been called a Shangri-la for “foreign-cubed” class actions with little connection to the United States. Over the past forty years, the standards used by American courts to determine their jurisdiction in international securities disputes have evolved, culminating in the U.S. Supreme Court’s Morrison decision of 2010. The new transactional test promulgated in Morrison replaced all of its predecessor tests, from a test measuring whether the conduct in question took place in the United States to a test measuring whether …