Comment by Harvey S. Bartlett III
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)'s class certification options are aimed at achieving either the goal of consistency of adjudication or the goal of efficient resource use. Aimed at the consistency goal, Rule 23(b)(2) requires an analysis of whether one common remedy is the most appropriate redress of a grievance, while Rule 23(b)(3) aims at the efficiency goal, focusing on the efficiency of redressing multiple individual grievances. This Comment explores this goal spectrum approach to class certification, specifically regarding Title VII employment discrimination class actions, traditionally certified under Rule 23(b)(2)'s remedy-centered analysis. This Comment then analyzes how the Fifth Circuit's decision in Allison v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., which focused purely on class members' individual interests rather than the propriety of a singular remedy, has tainted the subsequent development of class action remedies to broad-based employment discrimination.
About the Author
Harvey S. Bartlett III. J.D. 2000, Tulane University School of Law; B.A. 1994, Spring Hill College.
Citation
74 Tul. L. Rev. 2163 (2000)