Aggregate Litigation

This unit considers the way that courts and parties resolve cases outside of class actions. Arguably this area of the law involves fewer questions of doctrine and more questions of strategy and institutional design. We begin with a look at the laws that permit the aggregation of certain mass cases in the federal courts and how they have bee interpreted. This terrain is covered by two cases, Lexecon v. Millberg, Weiss and In re Silicone Gel Breast Implants Products Liability Litigation. The next case, Delaventura v. Columbia Acorn Trust provides some insights into the effects of MDL transfer on the parties. We then turn to the structure of aggregate settlements outside of class actions -- this is most often the result of aggregation. Here we will look at a few law review articles (available through West) and the suggestions of the ALI project on the Law of Aggregate Litigation. Then we will look at the effect of the ethics rules on lawyers attempts to resolve aggregate cases in The Tax Authority v. Jackson Hewitt. Finally, we will consider two attempts to resolve mass lawsuits through sampling and statistics: In re Chevron and Hilao v. Estate of Marcos. Finally, in the last part of the unit we will turn to the "quasi class action." This idea has filled the gap where class actions cannot guarantee global peace. What is the role of the judge in such litigation? Do you think the judges in In re Zyprexia and the 9/11 First Responders litigation overstepped the bounds of judicial restraint? If so, what should they have done instead?