Law Commons^™

The Roberts Court And Class Litigation: Revolution, Evolution, And Work To Be Done, Richard D. Freer

Faculty Articles

Since 2005, when John Roberts was appointed Chief Justice, there have been startling changes to the world of class actions. Jurisdictionally, the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 fundamentally reconfigured the allocation of class litigation between federal and state courts. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the federal class action provision, has been amended three times in the Roberts years, once in a meaningful way. Our focus, however, is on what the Roberts Court has done in the class action world through its caselaw. On that score, we have a remarkable corpus. From Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. …

Disrupting Work Law: Arbitration In The Gig Economy, Charlotte Garden

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

One Percent Procedure, Brooke D. Coleman

Faculty Articles

Political rhetoric about the one percent is pervasive, as those with the greatest concentrated wealth prosper and the remaining population stagnates. Because of their affluence, the one percent exercise disproportionate control over political and economic systems. This Article argues that federal civil procedure is similarly a one percent regime. The creme de la creme of the bench and bar, along with equally exclusive litigants, often engage in high-stakes, complex civil litigation. It is this type of litigation that dominates both the elite experience and the public perception of what civil litigation is. This litigation is not particularly common, however; while …

The Cfpb Anti-Arbitration Proposal: Let’S Just Give Arbitration A Chance, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

In October 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) announced that it would propose a rule banning class action waivers in arbitration agreements for consumer financial services products. This proclamation came to fruition in May 2016 when the CFPB proposed 12 C.F.R. part 1040 and sought public comment on the proposed rule. The CFPB claims that the class-waiver, often imbedded in consumer arbitration agreements, gives companies a “free pass from being held accountable by their customers[,]” comparing it to the relief a consumer can obtain as being part of a class action. At the same time, the CFPB proposed reporting …

Courts Should Apply A Relatively More Stringent Pleading Threshold To Class Actions, Matthew B. Lawrence

Faculty Articles

Policymakers from Senator Edward Kennedy to Civil Rules Advisory Committee Reporter Edward Cooper have proposed that class actions be subject to a more stringent pleading threshold than individually-filed suits, yet the question has not been fully explored in legal scholarship. This Article addresses that gap. It shows that courts following the guidance of Bell Atlantic v. Twombly should apply a relatively more stringent pleading threshold to class actions, and a relatively less stringent threshold to individually-filed suits.

This contribution is set forth in two steps. First, this Article explains that, all else being equal, the anticipated systems’ costs and benefits …

Confronting The Myth Of State Court Class Action Abuses Through An Understanding Of Heuristics And A Plea For More Statistics, Patricia W. Moore

Faculty Articles

The Supreme Court heard six cases involving class actions this term. One of these cases, Standard Fire Insurance Company v. Knowles, brought the Class Action Fairness Act to the Court for the first time. Petitioner insurance company and its numerous business-interest amici repeatedly claimed before the Court that "state court class action abuses" justified removal of the case (which was based on state law and filed in state court) to federal court.

The charge of a "flood" of "abusive state court class actions" echoed the same rhetoric that CAFA's supporters used a decade ago in their ultimately successful efforts to …

The Price Of Justice: An Analysis Of The Costs That Are Appropriately Considered In A Cost-Based Vindication Of Statutory Rights Defense To An Arbitration Agreement, Ramona L. Lampley

Faculty Articles

In the wake of AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, parties opposing enforcement of an arbitration agreement with a class waiver increasingly relied on the prohibitive-costs-based vindication of statutory rights defense. The Supreme Court recently held in American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant that the effective vindication doctrine cannot be used to invalidate an otherwise enforceable arbitration agreement with class-action waiver simply because the opponents have no “economic incentive” to pursue individual arbitration. However, the Court's bases for this holding are unclear and unnecessarily call into question the very existence of the “effective vindication doctrine.” This Article examines the historical …

Regulatory Litigation In The European Union: Does The U.S. Class Action Have A New Analogue?, S. I. Strong

Faculty Articles

The United States has long embraced the concept of regulatory litigation, whereby individual litigants, often termed “private attorneys general,” are allowed to enforce certain public laws as a matter of institutional design. Although several types of regulatory litigation exist, the U.S. class action is often considered the paradigmatic model for this type of private regulation.

For years, the United States appeared to be the sole proponent of both regulatory litigation and large-scale litigation. However, in February 2012, the European Union dramatically reversed its existing policies toward mass claims resolution when the European Parliament adopted a resolution proposing to create a …

The Irony Of At&T V. Concepcion, Colin P. Marks

Faculty Articles

Irony is defined as, “the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning.” Though many other definitions of the word exist, in light of the Supreme Court’s majority opinion in AT&T v. Concepcion, this definition comes to mind. Read broadly, the decision strikes a blow to the ability of consumers to bring suits against companies, both inside and outside of arbitration. But that was not the intent behind the federal act which the Court relied upon to justify its decision.

In 1925, when Congress passed the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), its intended …

The Court Of Appeals For The Fifth Circuit: A Legal Analysis And Statistical Review Of 2005-2006 Insurance Decisions, Willy E. Rice

Faculty Articles

he Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decided and published twenty-four insurance-related appeals between June 2005 and May 2006 from cases originating in seven federal district courts. Like petitioners in prior years, the overwhelming majority of the 2005-2006 appellants petitioned the court of appeals to reverse or vacate district courts' adverse summary judgments as well as the lower courts' allegedly questionable interpretations of various insurance contracts. Most of the controversies involved familiar procedural and substantive questions of law, but the Fifth Circuit also decided many questions of fact. Furthermore, several preemption questions and disputes over subject matter jurisdiction appeared among the …