Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Silencing Litigation Through Bankruptcy, Pamela Foohey, Christopher K. Odinet
Silencing Litigation Through Bankruptcy, Pamela Foohey, Christopher K. Odinet
Faculty Scholarship
Bankruptcy is being used as a tool for silencing survivors and their families. When faced with claims from multiple plaintiffs related to the same wrongful conduct that can financially or operationally crush the defendant over the long term—a phenomenon we identify as onslaught litigation—defendants harness bankruptcy’s reorganization process to draw together those who allege harm and pressure them into a swift, universal settlement. In doing so, they use the bankruptcy system to deprive survivors of their voice and the public of the truth. This Article identifies this phenomenon and argues that it is time to rein in this destructive use …
Antisuit Injunctions And Preclusion Against Absent Nonresident Class Members, Henry Paul Monaghan
Antisuit Injunctions And Preclusion Against Absent Nonresident Class Members, Henry Paul Monaghan
Faculty Scholarship
In this Article, Professor Monaghan addresses an issue of pressing concern in class action litigation today, namely, the extent to which a trial court's class judgment can bind – either by preclusion or injunction – unnamed nonresident class members, thus preventing them from raising due process challenges to the judgment in another court. After placing the antisuit injunction and preclusion issues in the context of recent class action and related developments, Professor Monaghan discusses the Supreme Court's 1985 decision in Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts and its applicability to these issues. In particular, Professor Monaghan criticizes reading Shutts' "implied …
Class Actions, Richard Briffault
Class Actions, Richard Briffault
Faculty Scholarship
In 1966, the Supreme Court promulgated an amended rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, replacing a rule that had remained unchanged since 1938. The 1938 rule, which was understood to reflect Professor Moore's famous distinctions among "true," "hybrid," and "spurious" class suits, proved to be a source of confusion almost from its date of promulgation, and by i966 courts were having great difficulty applying the concepts of joint and several rights the rule relied upon to define cases appropriate for class treatment. Commentators ignored the terms of the rule and sought justification for conclusive adjudication of absentee …