About the Course
Introduction
This CLE course will review practical techniques and considerations for supporting or challenging adequacy of proposed class representatives and/or class counsel under Rules 23(a)(4) and 23(g).
Description
Certification is doomed unless both class representatives and class counsel can adequately represent the members of a class. Rules 23(a)(4) and 23(g) are inextricably intertwined and are necessary to guard the due process rights of absent class members.
Starting at the pre-certification stage, the defense counsel's goal is to expose facts demonstrating that the named plaintiff, proposed class counsel, or both cannot fairly and adequately protect the interests of class members.
Equally important, class counsel must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the litigation. Courts have considered numerous factors other than those listed in FRCP 23(g) to withhold approval or even revoke approval of class counsel. All aspects of counsel's relationship with the proposed class representative, defendants, and members of the class in other cases come under scrutiny. Engagement letters and litigation financing arrangements are increasingly the subject of discovery.
Irrespective of the type of class action, Plaintiffs seeking class certification in federal court must satisfy a number of threshold requirements, including (1) the implicit requirements of an adequate class definition and an ascertainable class and (2) the threshold prerequisites set forth at Rule 23(a). The fourth of these prerequisites, described at Rule 23(a)(4) and commonly referred to as the “adequacy” requirement, requires Plaintiffs to establish that “the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.” As a general matter, the adequacy requirement covers class representatives, their counsel, and the relationship between the class representatives and their counsel. Rule 23(g) also governs considerations for adequacy of class counsel.
Listen as our authoritative panel of class litigators discusses the adequacy requirement from both plaintiffs and defendants perspectives. The panel will address practical techniques for selecting and vetting class representatives most likely to be deemed ‘adequate’ and considerations of defendants for challenging the adequacy requirements under Rules 23(a)(4) and 23(g).
Presented By
Mr. Neary is a distinguished attorney with extensive experience in complex commercial litigation, class action lawsuits, antitrust law, ERISA, product liability, and consumer protection, among other areas. He represents both plaintiffs and defendants in a diverse array of cases, practicing in both state and federal courts, including trial experience in nationwide class action litigation. Mr. Neary's litigation experience runs the gamut and includes a lead role on over twenty successful nationwide class actions against major mortgage lenders and servicers involving their force-placed insurance practices; representing patients in ERISA litigation against health insurers over the denial of life-saving cancer treatments; representing consumers in vehicle defect cases; nationwide antitrust matters involving algorithmic pricing; representing businesses in breach of contract and tortious interference litigation; and representing a former NFL player against various financial brokers before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) arbitration panel. His experience allows him to skillfully navigate the complexities of large-scale disputes, ensuring that the rights and interests of his clients are vigorously prosecuted or defended.
Ms. Simson is a litigator with a diverse practice focused on a broad range of complex commercial litigation as well as mass torts, product liability, life sciences, environmental, and financial services matters.
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
Date + Time
- event
Tuesday, December 1, 2020
- schedule
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
- Addressing adequacy of class representatives from Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ perspectives.
- Addressing adequacy of class counsel from Plaintiffs’ and Defendants’ perspectives
The panel will review practical techniques for selecting and vetting class representatives most likely to be deemed ‘adequate’ and considerations of defendants for challenging the adequacy requirements under Rules 23(a)(4) and 23(g).
Related Courses
Recommended Resources
