Choice of Law and Class Actions in United States Jurisdiction, Slides of Civil procedure

Download Choice of Law and Class Actions in United States Jurisdiction and more Slides Civil procedure in PDF only on Docsity! Agenda for 32nd Class • Name plates out • Choice of Law Continued • Introduction to Class Actions • Joinder Docsity.com Last Class -- Choice of Law • Traditional rules • Restatement (Second) – Find all states with contacts with dispute – Analyze the contacts • What policies lie behind each state’s laws? How would they be affected if another state’s laws applied to the dispute • Choose state with most significant relationship – E.g. whose policies would be least impaired by applying another state’s laws – Often indeterminate • Laws have many policies – Bias toward applying forum law • Judge likely to think her own state’s policies are important and impaired if other state’s laws are applied Docsity.com Choice of Law Questions • Plaintiff in Phillips brought the case in federal district court in Montana. Why is there a decision of the Supreme Court of Montana? • In Phillips, the Montana Supreme Court observes that “applying the law of the place of manufacture would be unfair because it would tend to leave victims under compensated as states wishing to attract and hold manufacturing companies would raise the threshold of liability and reduce compensation…. [A state with a high concentration of manufacturing] could enjoy all the benefits associated with liability laws which favored manufacturers in order to attract and retain manufacturing firms and encourage business within its borders while placing the costs of its legislative decision, in the form of less tort compensation, on the shoulders of nonresidents injured by its manufacturers’ products.” (p. 249). – Suppose Montana has a relatively low concentration of manufacturing. Would its citizens benefit by laws which raised the threshold of liability and reduced compensation? Or would its citizens benefit by laws which lowered the threshold of liability and increased compensation? If it lowered the threshold of liability and increased compensation, who would bear the increase in costs? What does this suggest about the fairness of applying Montana law? Docsity.com Choice of Law Questions • In Phillips, the Montana Supreme Court asserted that “we do not believe that the purpose of any potentially applicable Michigan product liability law would be to regulate the design and manufacture of products within its borders. The purpose of product liability law is to regulate interstate sales or sales to residents and to set the level of compensation when residents are injured. ” (p. 249) – If the plaintiffs in Phillips had filed the case in Michigan state court, do you think Michigan state judges would have agreed that its laws are inapplicable? What purpose might a Michigan judge ascribe to product liability law to show that Michigan law should apply? • If you were a judge on the Montana Supreme Court, would you have retained the traditional lex loci commissi rule, or would you have voted (like the actual Montana Supreme Court) to adopt the Restatement (Second) most significant relationship approach? Why? Docsity.com Class Actions I • Class Action is super joinder device – Way of joining lots of plaintiffs (or defendants) – Single lawyer represents all – Consent from each plaintiff not required – “Class representative” is “named plaintiff” • Usually chosen by class lawyer • Advantages – Low cost as compared to lots of individual suits – Allows case to be brought where each plaintiff has stake that is too small to justify individual suit • But where, in aggregate, significant wrong has been done • Disadvantages – Class lawyer does not always act in interest of class • May be more interested in fees for self than in relief for class – Large magnitude of potential liability may “coerce” defendants into settling weak claims Docsity.com Class Actions IV • Notice and Opt-Out. 23(c)(2) – Only (b)(3) requires “best notice that is practical under the circumstances” – Only (b)(3) requires the class members be given the opportunity to “opt out” • Settlement with court approval only. 23(e) Docsity.com Joinder • Rules start from assumption that suits may involve a single plaintiff suing a single defendant on a single claim – Multiple parties and claims are allowed ONLY if explicitly permitted by a rule • Proper joinder does NOT mean case properly in court, still need: – Personal jurisdiction – Subject matter jurisdiction – Venue Docsity.com Joinder Questions • Pp. 816 Q5 • Pp. 818ff. Qs 1-2 Docsity.com