Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons™

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Selected Works

Class Actions

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Constructing Issue Classes, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch Dec 2014

Constructing Issue Classes, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

As government budgets shrink each year, enforcement responsibilities in products liability, consumer protection, and employment discrimination fall increasingly to private attorneys. But defendants have successfully layered new objections about noncohesive classes and unascertainable members atop legislative and judicial reforms to cripple plaintiffs’ attorneys’ chief weapon — the class action. The result? Courts deny class certification and defendants escape enforcement by highlighting the differences among those affected by their misconduct. At the other end of the regulatory spectrum lies the opposite problem. Some defendants’ actions are so egregious that hordes of public and private regulators can’t help but get involved — …

Go to article

Adequately Representing Groups, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch Dec 2012

Adequately Representing Groups, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Adequate representation and preclusion depend on whether the courts treat a litigant as part of a group experiencing an aggregate harm or as a distinct person suffering individual injuries. And though a vast literature about adequate representation exists in the class-action context, it thins dramatically when contemplating other forms of group litigation, such as parens patriae actions and multidistrict litigation. As class actions have gradually fallen into disfavor and attorneys and commentators seek alternative means for resolving group harms, the relative clarity of Rule 23 wanes. How should courts evaluate adequate representation in parens patriae actions and in multidistrict litigation? …

Go to article

Procedural Adequacy, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch Dec 2009

Procedural Adequacy, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

This short piece responds to Jay Tidmarsh’s article, Rethinking Adequacy of Representation, 87 Texas Law Review 1137 (2009). I explore Professor Tidmarsh’s proposed “do no harm” approach to adequate representation in class actions from a procedural legitimacy perspective. I begin by considering the assumption underlying his alternative, namely that in any given class action both attorneys and class representatives tend to act as self-interested homo economicus and we must therefore tailor the adequacy requirement to curb self-interest only in so far as it makes class members worse off than they would be with individual litigation. Adopting the “do no harm” …

Go to article

Cafa's Impact On Litigation As A Public Good, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch Dec 2007

Cafa's Impact On Litigation As A Public Good, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Class actions regulate when government fails. Perhaps this use as an ex post remedy when ex ante regulation founders explains the fervor and rhetoric surrounding Rule 23’s political life. In truth, the class action does more than aggregate; it augments government policing and generates external societal benefits. These societal benefits – “externalities” – are the spillover effects from facilitating small claims litigation. In federalizing class actions through the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), Congress, in some ways, impeded class action practice, thereby negating its positive externalities and inhibiting backdoor regulation. This Article critically considers those effects on the common good. …

Go to article

Unsettling Efficiency: When Non-Class Aggregation Of Mass Torts Creates Second-Class Settlements, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch Nov 2004

Unsettling Efficiency: When Non-Class Aggregation Of Mass Torts Creates Second-Class Settlements, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

Abstract: The potential for attorneys to collude in reaching a settlement agreement arises in any large-scale aggregation of mass torts. In the 1990s, attorneys settled seventy-four percent of the mass tort cases consolidated for transfer by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. Even though most mass tort litigation settles, the judicial system ensures the fairness and integrity of settlements only in the bankruptcy and class action contexts. Consequently, the fairness of the settlement can vary depending on how the judicial system aggregates the claims. Only thirty-nine percent of aggregated claims resulted in class action settlements. Two percent received bankruptcy protections. …

Go to article

Between "Merit Inquiry" And "Rigorous Analysis": Using Daubert To Navigate The Gray Areas Of Federal Class Action Certification, Elizabeth C. Burch Sep 2004

Between "Merit Inquiry" And "Rigorous Analysis": Using Daubert To Navigate The Gray Areas Of Federal Class Action Certification, Elizabeth C. Burch

Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

In recent years, the class action certification hearing has become the latest forum for disputes over the reliability of expert testimony. Since these hearings may involve complex technical matters, litigants frequently try to introduce expert testimony to either establish or challenge the basic requirements for class certification. Yet, most courts do not conduct a Daubert analysis before admitting expert testimony during certification, evaluate the evidence according to a uniform standard, or adequately weigh opposing expert opinions. Even though the Federal Rules of Evidence codify procedures to ensure the reliability of expert testimony, courts have been reluctant to employ them during …

Go to article