40 W. St. U. L. Rev. 179 (2012-2013)
Navigating through the Aftermath of Wal-Mart v. Dukes: The Impact of Class Certification, and Options for Plaintiffs and Defendants

handle is hein.journals/wsulr40 and id is 187 raw text is: Navigating Through the Aftermath of Wal-mart v.
Dukes: The Impact on Class Certification, and
Options for Plaintiffs and Defendants
I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 179
II. THE HISTORY OF CLASS ACTIONS ....................... ............ 180
A. Early English History       .................................. 180
B. Evolution of the Class Action in the United States ............. 181
III. CLASS ACTIONS TODAY: HOW THE MODERN CERTIFICATION PROCESS
CAN LEAD TO INEQUITY ................................... ......... 182
A. The Low Economic Risk to Plaintiffs Relative to the High
Economic Risk to Defendants  ............................ 183
B. Preclusion: Bar on Class Members' Ability to File Individual
Claims after a Judgment or a Settlement..................... 183
IV. WAL-MART, INC. v. DUKES AND ITS LEGACY ........................  184
A. Analysis of Wal-Mart, Inc. v. Dukes and the Possible Reasons
Behind the Decision .     ................................... 184
B. Post-Dukes Decisions in Federal Courts  ..................... 185
C. Post-Dukes Decisions in California Courts  ................... 187
V. TAKEAWAY: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ATTORNEYS ON BOTH SIDES .... 189
A. Plaintiffs' Attorney ...  .......................  ....... 189
1. Common Contention Capable of Classwide Resolution ....... 189
2. Alleging a Company-Wide Policy ...................... 190
3. Statistical Evidence  ................................. 191
4. Distinguishing the Facts  ............................. 191
5. Drafting a Class Carefully to Meet All or Most of the
Preceding Recommendations .   .......................... 192
B. Defendant's Attorney ...   ......................  ....... 192
1. Raise the Issue of Commonality ........................ 192
2. Pointing out Dissimilarities Within the Class ............... 193
VI. CONCLUSION .......................................... ............. 193
I. INTRODUCTION
Wal-Mart, Inc. v. Dukes (Dukes) has greatly impacted class action litigation
across the country, including California, where even state courts have followed its
holding. In Dukes, the U.S. Supreme Court has created a much stricter standard for a
once easily met commonality requirement for class certification. This article analyzes
that rule and suggests best practices for class action lawyers in a post-Dukes era.
This article consists of four sections. The first three sections provide a background for
the ultimate objective of the article covered in the last section, which is to provide
advice to practitioners with regards to this new and stricter commonality standard.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing nearly 2,700 academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline with pricing starting as low as $29.95

Access to this content requires a subscription. Please visit the following page to request a quote or trial:

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?