Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Class Certification In Property Insurance Disputes
The 2005 hurricane season, including the devastation wreaked by Hurricane Katrina, caused estimated losses of $75 billion. The insured property damage from the five major hurricanes in 2005 reached $52.7 billion. Hurricane Katrina alone caused more property loss than had occurred in the entire prior year, posting $27.3 billion. See http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_news&id=73930. In light of these unprecedented losses, a record number of lawsuits have been filed stemming from damage caused by the 2005 storms. Predictably, an equally high number of class action suits have been filed, purportedly on behalf of those affected by the storms. Despite this flurry of class action suits, the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and its state counterparts clearly limit the use of class action suits to very specific, enumerated circumstances that simply do not include first-party insurance disputes, widespread property damage claims, or claims for bad faith and/or unfair trade practices in the adjustment of insurance claims, even where the damage was due to a common weather event.
Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiffs seeking class certification must satisfy the requirements of F.R.C.P. 23. Under F.R.C.P. 23(a), a plaintiff must first establish the four elements commonly referred to as numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation. F.R.C.P. Rule 23(a). Rule 23(a)(2), the 'commonality requirement' instructs that issues of law or fact must be common to the entire class. The commonality requirement is satisfied if at least one issue's resolution will affect all or a significant number of class members. James v. City of Dallas, 254 F.3d 551, 570 (5th Cir. 2001). However, even if a plaintiff class meets the requirements outlined in F.R.C.P. 23(a), plaintiffs must also demonstrate that one of several other enumerated factors is applicable. In most instances, class litigants rely on subsection 23(b)(3), which requires a court determination that questions of law or fact common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is the superior method for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. In making this determination, F.R.C.P. 23 instructs the court to consider the interest of the members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution of separate actions, the extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy which has already commenced, the desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of the claims in a particular forum, and the difficulties likely to be encountered in managing the class action. F.R.C.P. 23(b)(3) is typically referred to as the 'predominance and superiority' test. Furthermore, while subsection 23(b)(3) does not necessarily exclude cases where individual damages are high, 'the Advisory Committee had dominantly in mind vindication of the rights of groups of people who individually would be without effective strength to bring their opponents into court at all,' or those whose individual claims would be too small to warrant litigation. Achem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 617 (1997); Smilow v. Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc., 323 F.3d 32 (1st Cir. 2003).
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.