Monday, September 27, 2010

Burch on Class Aspects of Dukes v. Wal-Mart

Burch Beth Burch (Florida State) has posted on SSRN her introduction to the Dukes v. Wal-Mart class action forthcoming in the Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc as part of a roundtable discussion of the case. Beth is a class action and non-class aggregate litigation expert, and her introduction to the class issues of that case are very helpful for those of us who aren't proceduralists. Here is her abstract:

This introduction to Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. aims to explain the case and to set the table for what promises to be thought-provoking roundtable discussion hosted by Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc. Accordingly, what follows is a concise overview of the legal background and current debate over the two procedural issues that the Ninth Circuit explored in detail—how to evaluate Rule 23(a)(2)’s commonality when common questions heavily implicate the case’s merits, and when a Rule 23(b)(2) class can include relief apart from injunctive or declaratory relief without endangering due process.

Beth also has this post at the Mass Tort Litigation Blog describing the roundtable, which includes Melissa Hart (Colorado) and additional impressive folks:

Though I realize that, as an employment discrimination class action, Dukes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. technically falls outside the realm of mass torts, its class action status has most proceduralists watching with interest to see whether the Supreme Court will grant Wal-Mart's petition for a writ of certiorari.  Over the next two months, Vanderbilt Law Review En Banc will be hosting a Roundtable discussion on the case that includes Robert Bone, Melissa Hart, the blog's own Alexandra Lahav, Greg Mitchell, Richard Nagareda, and Tobias Wolff.  (Richard's essay, Common Answers for Class Certification is already on SSRN.)

It looks to be an excellent discussion.


Employment Discrimination, Scholarship | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Burch on Class Aspects of Dukes v. Wal-Mart:


Post a comment