About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

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 thousands of 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.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most