Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 - Support

Support

The Act accomplished two key goals of tort reform advocates:

  1. Reduce "forum-shopping" by plaintiffs in friendly state courts by expanding federal diversity jurisdiction to class actions where there is not "complete diversity" giving federal jurisdiction over class actions against out-of-state defendants. Proponents argued that "magnet jurisdictions" such as Madison County, Illinois were rife with abuse of the class action procedure.
  2. Requires greater federal scrutiny procedures for the review of class action settlements and changes the rules for evaluating coupon settlements, often reducing attorney's fees that are deemed excessive relative to the benefits actually afforded class members. For example, in an infamous Alabama class action involving Bank of Boston, the attorneys' fees exceeded the relief to the class members, and class members lost money paying attorneys for the "victory."

The Act passed the Senate 72 to 26, with all 53 Republicans voting in favor, and the Act passed the House 279 to 149, with the support of 50 Democrats and all but one of the Republicans. President George W. Bush signed the act into law on February 18, 2005.


United States Federal
Civil Procedure Doctrines
Justiciability
Advisory opinions
Standing · Ripeness · Mootness
Political questions
Jurisdiction
Subject-matter jurisdiction
  • Federal question jurisdiction
  • Diversity jurisdiction
Amount in controversy
  • Supplemental jurisdiction
Pendent jurisdiction
Ancillary jurisdiction
  • Removal jurisdiction
  • Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
Personal jurisdiction
In personam
In rem jurisdiction
Quasi in rem jurisdiction
Federalism
Erie doctrine · Abstention
Sovereign immunity · Abrogation
Rooker-Feldman doctrine
Adequate and
independent state ground
edit this template

Read more about this topic:  Class Action Fairness Act Of 2005

Famous quotes containing the word support:

    A clergyman, again, can hardly ever allow himself to look facts fairly in the face. It is his profession to support one side; it is impossible, therefore, for him to make an unbiased examination of the other.
    Samuel Butler (1835–1902)

    To suppose such a thing possible as a society, in which men, who are able and willing to work, cannot support their families, and ought, with a great part of the women, to be compelled to lead a life of celibacy, for fear of having children to be starved; to suppose such a thing possible is monstrous.
    William Cobbett (1762–1835)

    Can you support the expense of a husband, hussy, in gaming, drinking and whoring? Have you money enough to carry on the daily quarrels of man and wife about who shall squander most?
    John Gay (1685–1732)