This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Procedural versus Substantive Controls of Mass Tort Class Actions

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Priest, George L
Abstract

Class certification in a mass tort case confers extraordinary negotiating power even where the underlying claim is meritless. This power stems from the prosper that claims of a large-numbered class might reach a jury that might render a larger aggregate judgment under our vastly looser tort law standards. The power is so extreme that all mass tort claims certified as classes appear to settle, rather than litigate to judgment. Recommendations for class action reform have been solely procedural since Rule 23 has been implemented without substantive review of the underlying claim. This article shows that recent reform efforts in fact attempt to Impose substantive controls on mass tort class actions through procedural means, efforts that necessarily will remain inadequate. The various problems attending mass tort class actions can only be effectively addressed if courts are given power to substantively review the underlying merits of a claim prior to class certification. Copyright 1997 by the University of Chicago.

Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Publisher Info
Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Legal Studies.

Volume (Year): 26 (1997)
Issue (Month): 2 (June)
Pages: 521-73
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:26:y:1997:i:2:p:521-73

Contact details of provider:
Postal: The University of Chicago Press, Journals Division, P.O. Box 37005 Chicago, IL 60637
Fax: (773) 753-0811
Email:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/

Order Information:
Web: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS/order1.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).

Related research
Keywords:

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Michelle J. White, 2002. "Explaining the Flood of Asbestos Litigation: Consolidation, Bifurcation, and Bouquet Trials," NBER Working Papers 9362, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Hans-Bernd Schaefer, 2000. "The Bundling of Similar Interests in Litigation. The Incentives for Class Action and Legal Actions taken by Associations," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 183-213, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Warren Schwartz, 1999. "Long Shot Class Actions," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series 1039, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? RePEc also has a blog.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-12.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.