Other Contributors

About Us

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Steubenville Rape Case and Libel Suit | Main | Study: Generic Drug Label Warnings Are Often Different From the Brand-Name Labels on Which They Are (Supposedly) Based »

Monday, December 17, 2012


Rob Bramson

Thanks for the interesting post, Brian.

Another context when this might arise is where there are overlapping classes, with the class representative in one case proposing a settlement while the class representative in the other case thinks that it's a raw deal for that portion of the (proposed) settling class who qualify under both class definitions.

The problem for that second class representative is the general rule that only "class members" can object to a proposed settlement. So the person must choose between opting out and continuing on with his/her own class case (while sacrificing the right to object) or to risk losing the ability to act as class representative in the other case by objecting rather than opting out of the settling one.

This kind of non-party intervention for objection purposes would solve that problem.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

May 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31