class action

class action in law, a device that permits one or more persons to sue or be sued as representative of a large group of people interested in the matter at issue. The court in whose jurisdiction a suit is brought typically has wide discretion in determining that a class will be so represented. Certain requirements must be met, e.g., the class must be so large or dispersed that actual joinder of all individuals would be impractical; there must be questions of law and fact common to all members, and these must outweigh any individual questions; and the named parties must adequately represent the interests of their class. Certain forms of notice to members of the class, e.g., by newspaper or broadcast publication or by mail, are also required. In most types of suit, all members of the class are bound by the decision, unless a member of the class opted out of the action at the beginning of the lawsuit. An absentee member may be able to contest the outcome on the basis that due process of law was not adhered to.

In the United States, federal and most state courts allow class action suits. Such suits have figured prominently in civil-rights litigation and in other cases brought to further social and economic reform. In recent decades they have been employed notably by groups of consumers and others seeking to affix liability for harm caused by various products, especially through manufacturers' negligence . Major litigation against the producers of the Dalkon shield (an intrauterine device; see birth control ), of Agent Orange (a herbicide used as a defoliant in the Vietnam War), and of asbestos insulation has involved class action suits.

Since the 1980s such suits have been under attack, along with negligence litigation in general, with opponents, mainly conservatives and business interests, arguing that many lawsuits are frivolous and that awards are out of proportion to the offense in some juridictions. A study published in 2004 that reviewed several hundred state and federal class action lawsuits from 1993 to 2002 found that, adjusted for inflation, the average annual award in such suits varied but did not progressively increase, while the median award was relatively constant. At the same time, however, federal court data showed that the number of class action lawsuits doubled from 1997 to 2002.

Bibliography: See study by S. Yeazell (1987).

Class Actions The class action has developed in the twentieth century as a way of managing complex, multiparty litigation. It may be traced to the “bill of peace,” a proceeding that originated in England's equity courts in the seventeenth century. The bill of peace was used when the parties to a dispute were too numerous to be easily managed and when all parties shared a common interest in the issues. It permitted the case to be tried by representative parties, with the judgment rendered binding all. This was more efficient than trying each case individually and was more consistent with equity's goal of doing complete justice (see Injunctions and Equitable Remedies).

American courts continued to use the bill of peace. Its most eloquent spokesman was Justice Joseph Story. In his Equity Jurisprudence (1836) and his Equity Pleadings (1838), Story stated that the purpose of the bill of peace was to promote finality. Law courts could only try issues between the plaintiff and the defendant in a particular case. Equity courts possessed a “power to bring all the parties before them, … at once to proceed to the ascertainment of the general right, … and then to make a decree finally binding upon all the parties.” The bill of peace provided a way to resolve multiparty disputes quickly and effectively.

The effectiveness of the bill of peace and the class action that evolved from it was limited in two ways. First, the procedure applied only in equity cases. To remedy that, it was broadened in 1938 by adoption of rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to include all cases in law as well as equity. Second, some doubt was expressed in early federal cases whether a judgment could bind unnamed parties. This uncertainty remained until 1966, when rule 23 was amended to make it clear that unnamed parties were bound.

Modern rules have defined three kinds of class actions. The first is appropriate where separate litigation might adversely affect members of the class or the defendant in one of two ways. First, the defendant might have inconsistent standards of conduct imposed in piecemeal litigation. Second, multiple suits might “impair or impede” the class members (usually plaintiffs) from protecting their various interests. In the second kind of class action, a class seeks an injunction or some form of declaratory relief. In the third category, a class action is available where questions common to the class predominate over questions peculiar to each plaintiff, and a class action is superior to other proceedings as a means of resolving the controversy among the parties. For this third variety of class action only, rule 23 permits individual members of the class to opt out of litigation if they do not wish to be bound by the results of the class action.

Class actions have become commonplace today, especially as a vehicle for social and economic reform. Many of the leading civil rights cases, for example, were commenced by class action. The class action is also used to promote consumer protection. It is frequently used in antitrust cases and to combat consumer fraud, price fixing, and other commercial abuses. It is also widely utilized in mass tort cases, where numerous plaintiffs are injured at the hands of a single defendant. The Dalkon Shield, Agent Orange, and asbestos cases are prominent examples.

Bibliography

Stephen Yeazell , From Medieval Group Litigation to the Modern Class Action (1987).

James B. Stoneking