Comment by Cherry Joy Beysselance
Class actions are an important and unique form of litigation in the American judicial system. The class action is designed to provide small claimants with access to the courts, to redress wrongs which affect numerous individuals, and to promote judicial economy by providing for the adjudication of many claims in a single action.
In addition to its advantages, however, the class suit presents special procedural problems, both at the outset of the action and on appeal, if one is taken. At the outset, apart from any proof of the merits of his substantive claims, the plaintiff must establish that a class exists and that the litigation should proceed as a class action. No particular procedure exists for making such a showing and often the precise factual basis for a court's approval or denial of class status is unclear. If class certification is denied, the class claims cannot be heard. Problems of standing and the application of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure which governs class actions may foreclose any appeal of a denial of class status. Thus, procedural obstacles may spell defeat for the class prior to any adjudication of the substantive claims of the class.
This comment seeks to explore some of the procedural problems which arise in the context of class suits. Specifically, the comment will first examine the typicality requirement as stated in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(3), document the various interpretations given the requirement by the courts, and present a functional definition of the requirement for use in determining whether a class should be certified initially. Secondly, the comment will focus on the problems which arise when a named plaintiff, who has lost on the merits of his individual claim, seeks to appeal a denial of class certification. Reviewing Supreme Court jurisprudence and analyzing recent decisions of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on the subject, the comment seeks to ascertain what, if any, relationship considerations of typicality have, or should have, in evaluating, on appeal, the propriety of class certification.
About the Author
Cherry Joy Beysselance.
Citation
56 Tul. L. Rev. 1331 (1982)