“‘Rough Justice’ Is Not Justice,” Law360
“Recent decisions from the United States Supreme Court have highlighted the inherent tension in class action litigation between, on one hand, the ideal of an efficient system that can, on a collective basis, vindicate rights that would not otherwise be litigated and, on the other hand, the reality of a just system that neither tramples a defendant’s right to raise all available defenses nor unfairly compromises the claims of absent class members,” write David S. Osterman and H. Lockwood (Chip) Miller III, partners in Goldberg Segalla’s Product Liability and Class Action Litigation Practice Groups.
In this article, Dave and Chip examine how this tension has boiled up again in the Third Circuit in the context of established case law addressing the requirement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c) that any class certification order must “define the class and the class claims.”
Read the article here:
- David S. Osterman and H. Lockwood (Chip) Miller III, “‘Rough Justice’ Is Not Justice,” Law360, November 6, 2013