Skip to main content

Search

Consumer Class Actions: KANSAS CLASS ACTIONS STATUTES

60-223. Class actions100

(a) Prerequisites. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all members only if

(1) The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable;

(2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class;

Consumer Class Actions: 1. Comparison with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Rule 23 of the Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure is similar to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.101 Manning v. Liberty Tire Servs. of Ohio, LLC, 577 S.W. 3d 102, 109 n.3 (Ky. Ct. App. 2019). CR 23 does include a provision similar to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f) at CR 23.06. Kentucky courts look to decisions under the Federal Rule for guidance. Hensley v. Haynes Trucking, 549 S.W.3d 430, 436 (Ky. 2018); Nebraska Alliance Realty Co. v. Brewer, 529 S.W.3d 307, 311 (Ky. Ct. App. 2017); Lamar v.

Consumer Class Actions: 2. Case Law Interpreting Rule 23

The trial court must “probe behind the pleadings,” conduct a “rigorous analysis,” and have evidentiary support for its conclusions when evaluating class certification.102 Hensley, 549 S.W.3d at 445–46. Additionally, the trial court must make findings of fact, which demonstrate that the requirements of Civil Rule 23.01 have been met, and issue an order outlining its findings. Rose v. The Council for Better Education, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186, 202 (Ky. 1989); Pyro Mining Co. v. Ky.

Consumer Class Actions: 3. Miscellaneous Comments

a. Sums of the claims of individual class members may not be aggregated in order to meet the jurisdictional amount requirement for actions brought in Kentucky Circuit Courts. Lamar v. Office of Sheriff of Daviess County, 669 S.W.2d 27, 31 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984).

b. A trial court that renders class action judgment cannot predetermine whether judgment is res judicata. Board of Educ. of Fayette County v. Taulbee, 706 S.W.2d 827, 830 (Ky. 1986).

Consumer Class Actions: KENTUCKY RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Rule 23 Class actions

Rule 23.01 Prerequisites to class action103

Subject to the provisions of Rule 23.02, one or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if

(a) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable,

(b) there are questions of law or fact common to the class,

Consumer Class Actions: I. Comparison with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

For the most part, Louisiana’s current class action scheme, which was amended and effective July 1997, is the same as Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.111 See La. C.C.P. art. 591. The former procedures for class actions in Louisiana were also very similar to federal law, although the language of the statute was different. See Ford v. Murphy Oil U.S.A., Inc., 795 So. 2d 419 (La. App. 2001); McCastle v. Rollins Environmental Services, 456 So.2d 612 (La. 1984); Stevens v.

Consumer Class Actions: 2. Interpretive Case Law

An appellate court reviews a district court’s factual findings regarding class certification under a manifest error standard; however, the “ultimate decision of whether or not to certify the class is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard.” Dupree v. Lafayette Inc. Co, 51 So.3d 673, 680 (La. 2010). Although Louisiana utilized Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 as a guide in amending its class action statutes, there are some provisions of Louisiana’s law that are different and/or which there is no analog in Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. Those differences are as follows:

Consumer Class Actions: LOUISIANA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Art. 591. Prerequisites; maintainable class actions112

A. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all, only if:

(1) The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.

(2) There are questions of law or fact common to the class.

Consumer Class Actions: 3. History of Me. R. Civ. P. 23.

A discussion of the history of Maine Rule 23, together with the reporter’s original notes accompanying the promulgation of Maine Rule 23 in 1959, is set forth in Field, McKusick & Wroth, Maine Civil Practice 385 (1970 & 1981 Supp.).

Consumer Class Actions: 4. Other Statutes Authorizing Class Action Proceedings

In addition to Rule 23, Maine has enacted a variety of statutes over the years that allow proceedings to be commenced on behalf of others. The most notable of these are the sections of the Maine Business Corporations Act that provide for shareholder derivative actions. See 13C M.R.S.A. §§  751, et seq. and M.R. Civ. P. 23A and 23B.

Consumer Class Actions: 1. Development of Maryland Rule 2-231

In 1975 the Appellate Court123 acknowledged the “dearth of authority” on former Rule 209, finding a single case “only peripherally” addressing class actions.124 See Johnson v. Chrysler Credit Corp., 26 Md. App. 122, 126, 337 A.2d 210, 212–13 (1975) (citing Hooks v. Comptroller of Treas., 265 Md. 380, 289 A.2d 332 (1972)) (holding that § 348 of Retail Sales Tax Act prohibits taxpayers from bringing action on behalf of others).

Consumer Class Actions: 4. Interesting Cases

In April 1998, tobacco manufacturers and related entities filed a petition with the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus requesting that the Supreme Court vacate the certification by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City of two classes of Maryland residents who, as current or former users of tobacco products, sued the manufacturers claiming to have been injured by tobacco use or addicted to nicotine. Philip Morris Inc. v. Angeletti, 358 Md. 689, 752 A.2d 200 (2000)); see also Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Brown, No. 355, SEPT. TERM, 2020, 2020 WL 3790868, at *1 (Md. App.

Consumer Class Actions: MARYLAND RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Rule 2-231. Class actions.126

(a) Permitted Classes. Only plaintiff classes may be named in an action and certified by the court. Defendant classes shall not be named or certified.

(b) Prerequisites to a Class Action. One or more members of a plaintiff class may sue as representative parties on behalf of all only if

(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable,

Consumer Class Actions: 1. Massachusetts Law Provides for Two Distinct Types of Class Action

Two forms of class action are available under Massachusetts law.127 Rule 23 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure establishes a class action rule of general applicability that is modeled on Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 though, as discussed below, it differs from the federal rule in several material respects. Massachusetts Rule 23 applies to all actions seeking to assert civil claims on behalf of a putative class other than those arising under the Massachusetts unfair and deceptive trade practices statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch.

Consumer Class Actions: 2. Comparison of Mass. R. Civ. P. 23 with Fed R. Civ. P. 23

Rule 23 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure is similar in many respects to its federal cognate, Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, but omits certain provisions that are present in the federal rule. Because Mass. R. Civ. P. 23 was modeled on the federal rule, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC)129 has held that where the Massachusetts rule omits text used in the federal rule, it reflects a conscious choice by the Legislature not to adopt the associated federal procedure.

Consumer Class Actions: 3. Case Law Interpreting Specific Prongs of Mass. R. Civ. P. 23

A litigant seeking to certify a class action must satisfy Mass. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b) and must also be a member of the class he or she seeks to represent at the time of certification. Bellermann v. Fitchburg Gas & Elec. Light Co., 470 Mass. 43, 52, 18 N.E.3d 1050 (2014); Gonzalez v. Comm’r of Correction, 407 Mass. 448, 451, 553 N.E.2d 1295, 1298 (1990); see Beauchesne v. New England Neurological Assocs., P.C., 98 Mass. App. Ct.

Consumer Class Actions: 4. Multi-State Class Actions Generally Precluded in Massachusetts State Courts

The most significant differences between Mass. R. Civ. P. 23 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23—the absence of an “opt out” provision and mandatory notice requirement—work together to preclude, on due process grounds, the certification of most putative multi-state class actions in Massachusetts state courts. Moelis v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co., 451 Mass. 483, 486–87, 887 N.E.2d 214, 218–19 (2008). In Blake v.

Consumer Class Actions: 5. Consumer Class Actions Under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A

a. Predominance and Superiority May Be Considered But Are Not Required

The Massachusetts unfair or deceptive trade practices statute, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 9(2), provides an additional vehicle for the certification of a consumer class action in Massachusetts state court. The requirements for class certification under this statute are less well-defined than under Mass. R. Civ. P. 23:

Consumer Class Actions: 6. Class Actions Under the Massachusetts Wage Act

The Massachusetts Wage Act specifically empowers plaintiffs aggrieved by certain statutory violations to prosecute a class action on “behalf of others similarly situated” for injunctive relief, damages, lost wages, and other benefits. Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 150. However, the Wage Act does not grant automatic class status, so a class may be certified on a Wage Act claim only if the requirements of Rule 23 are otherwise satisfied. See Gammella v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc. 482 Mass.