IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Long Shot Class Actions

Listed author(s):
  • Schwartz, Warren F.
Registered author(s):

    This paper considers the question whether plaintiffs, whose claims pose an important common issue, and are thought to be unlikely to prevail on this issue, should be permitted to maintain a class action in which this issue will be resolved or be required to litigate their claims in individual suits. The paper takes as its point of departure an opinion of Judge Richard Posner offering a novel and complex theoretical justification for requiring plaintiffs to proceed individually. This justification rests on ideas with respect to how claims thought to be unlikely to prevail should be viewed, how the risks created by legal uncertainty should be distributed and how decision making should be structured to take account of the different verdicts various juries might render with respect to identical cases. These ideas have very general and important implications. The paper concludes that Judge Posner's opinion suppresses important issues implicated by his analysis and that consideration of these issues leads to a view much more inclined to permit the class action to go forward than the one advanced by Judge Posner.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics in its series Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series with number qt7fv8k94q.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 01 Jul 1999
    Handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt7fv8k94q
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Boalt Hall, Berkeley, CA 94720

    Fax: (510) 642-3767
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    References listed on IDEAS
    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.:

    in new window

    1. Craswell, Richard & Calfee, John E, 1986. "Deterrence and Uncertain Legal Standards," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 279-303, Fall.
    2. Priest, George L, 1997. "Procedural versus Substantive Controls of Mass Tort Class Actions," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 521-573, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt7fv8k94q. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.