How can this Class Action legislation be overturned ?

[shance]

and/ or circumvented?

This is terrible legislation that will harm Americans and our power to make corporations accountable.

What is the procedure to overturn horrible legislation like this?

What can citizens do?

[bowens43]

1. Pass legislation repealing it.

[chelsea0011]

2. maybe a class action suit will help

And about class action suits. I with my Toshiba laptop was involved with one of those class action suits that Bush complained that people don't even know about, therefore, are bad. Well, the suit involved the LCD screen and it's ability to quit out. The suit got Toshiba to fix any laptop with this problem free of charge. We never knew about the suit and put the information aside when it arrived by mail. We had no problems with the computer. Then the screen went black. Hmmmm. Where's that info sent to us. We located it and lo and behold this is the problem we are experiencing and Toshiba will fix it for free. These suits can work.

[candy]

3. You can still file class action suits in Federal Court.

The greedy anbulance chasing lawyers are responsible for the change.

The minute it comes out in the news that there are POSSIBLY problems with something they advertise all over TV,radio,aand newspapers to get clients to file class action suits.

The lawyers make millions,the consumer gets next to nothing,

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

6. I so LOATHE posts like this...please try to KNOW your subject before

posting about it. Class action suits are NOT intended to MAKE PEOPLE RICH but to CHANGE behavior and ARE effective. Here are a few fact sheets on how they HAVE changed business AND government behavior:

From the Brennan Center for Justice:

Class action suits, brought on behalf of LSC-grantees' clients, have helped hundreds of thousands of Americans, including the elderly, children, the infirm and others. In addition to providing remedies for the individual plaintiffs' injustices, a class action suit can ensure that similar injustices are prevented in the future. Some examples of important class actions include:

* When the city of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania deemed children age four and older ineligible and terminated them without any written notice of opportunity for hearing from the Women, Infants and Children ("WIC") program, which provides food to children faced with the risk of malnutrition because of inadequate income, a class action suit on behalf of those children obtained a favorable decision from a judge who deemed the terminations unconstitutional, required Pennsylvania to devise fair hearing regulations, and ensured that other children would not go without food in the future due to reckless bureaucratic error.

* When the elderly were improperly denied Medicare reimbursement for treatment because the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") was not monitoring Health Maintenance Organizations ("HMOs"), a class action won thousands expedited fair hearings from the HMOs and required HHS to cancel contracts with HMOs that failed to provide fair hearings and appeals for Medicare beneficiaries.

* Individuals denied Supplementary Security Income disability benefits challenged an HHS policy of deeming their impairments "not severe" without inquiring into their age, education, work history, and the combined impact of their multiple health impairments. The court required HHS to assist individuals in obtaining evidence of disability and to review their claims based on complete records.

* When African-American workers at Caulkins Indiantown Citrus Company showed that the company had cheated them out of years of wages and benefits because of their skin color, more than 730 workers obtained damage payments. Lead plaintiff John Henry Robinson explained that the victory meant even more to him than the money: "When a person is stripped of their dignity and pride, it feels like someone has reached inside of you and tore your heart out."

* African-American public housing residents in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania showed that the city of Philadelphia, the Housing Authority, the Redevelopment Authority, and the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development had violated their constitutional rights as well as their rights under civil rights laws by stalling progress on construction of a new public housing development in a primarily white neighborhood. As a result, the public housing development was built and today remains one of Philadelphia's most successful integrated housing developments.
http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/pov/factsheet_classact.html

Class Action – What’s at Stake for American Consumers

Class action lawsuits combine thousands of small claims into one suit, permitting recovery for small claims that would not be practical to redress in individual lawsuits. Class actions have resulted in refunds to consumers for fraudulent HMO, credit card and telecom billing practices; free medical check-ups for persons exposed to toxic substances; and most importantly, changes to business practices that cheated or threatened the health of consumers. Class action suits allow regular citizens to hold corporations accountable for pollution, employment abuses, and consumer fraud. It is an essential component to maintaining corporate accountability and protecting consumer rights.

The current bill contains one-sided provisions that lower legal hurdles for defendants while raising them for victims and consumers. It is an attempt by the business lobby to restrict consumer access to the courts and limit rewards claimed by regular people and their lawyers. The bill moves class action suits from state courts, where they have traditionally been heard, to unsuitable and overburdened federal courts, which are much more friendly to corporate interests.

* Disadvantages for Injured Consumers in Federal Courts (PDF), Public Citizen *

Whether a case is brought to a state or federal court can determine the outcome without it ever being heard by a judge. Most states have very similar, well-defined provisions that allow class action cases for consumer protections. There is no general, catchall federal consumer protection law that individual consumers may invoke.

Federal courts are also overburdened and understaffed which will leave class action consumers in litigation limbo for years. The federal courts’ high judicial vacancy rate and increased caseload of traditionally state- court matters have led to considerable backlogs of civil cases. The number of federal civil cases pending for three years or more has doubled since 1999 to more than 34,000.

* Backlogged Courts Leave Consumers Behind (PDF), U.S. Courts, Federal Judiciary

Corporate Support for Anti-Consumer Bill

At least 100 major corporations and pro-business associations have banded together to spend millions of dollars and to employ at least 475 lobbyists to ensure that class-action legislation is tilted in their favor, according to a Public Citizen report released in 2003 and another released in May 2004 (PDF).

No industry has thrown more effort into federalizing class action lawsuits than insurance companies which have devoted at least 193 lobbyists to the issue. Other industries with strong support for this legislation include tobacco companies, bank and consumer credit agencies, auto manufacturers, pharmaceutical producers, and gas and oil producers.

Many corporations that claim to be victims of unjustified class actions have, in fact, engaged in unfair and harmful practices that would not have been corrected if consumers had not been represented in class action lawsuits.

TAKE ACTION today to protect consumer rights!

Learn More

* Class action reports and fact sheets, Public Citizen *
* What the Experts Are Saying (PDF), National Association of Consumer Advocates
* Nationwide editorials opposing the Class Action Bill (PDF), Public Citizen *
* Class Action “Judicial Hellholes”: Empirical Evidence Is Lacking, Public Citizen *
* Statement Opposing Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, Alliance for Justice *
* Torts Flim-Flam, Larry Mishel, The American Prospect *
* Attorney’s Fees and Plaintiffs Recoveries in Class Action Cases: Myths Obscure Facts (PDF), Public Citizen *
* Frequent Filers: Corporate Hypocrisy in Accessing the Courts (PDF), Public Citizen *
* Nationwide Consumer Class Actions in Federal Courts: A Case of False Advertising (PDF), Public Citizen *

Organizational Statements

* Statement from Alliance for Justice * (PDF)
* Letter from civil rights/labor groups about an amendment to the bill (PDF)
* Letter from consumer groups opposing the bill (PDF)
* Letter from law professors raising concerns about the bill (PDF)
* Letter from state attorneys general opposing the bill (PDF)
* Letter from environmental groups opposing the bill (PDF)
* Letter from AARP * opposing the bill (PDF)

http://www.movingideas.org/content/en/on_the_hill/class_action_fairness_act_2005.htm


Now..if a few lawyers got pig ass rich helping the masses who are YOU to knock them...they've literally assisted MILLIONS!

[shance]

10. Thanks NSMA***That's great info.

Definitely a keeper.

And of course you're right with regards to the mythic Im going to win the lotto by suing a huge corporation.

It's what I, and thousands of others used to think before I learned the truth.

[TahitiNut]

23. (grin) We even share the same "fear and loathing" it seems.

I wouldn't expect anyone who's all self-righteously warm and comfy with a simplistic second-hand opinion that demonizes a handy-dandy scapegoat of corporatism to bother reading more than a sound bite. Heaven forbid that anyone really understand that "rule of law" refers to broad and easy individual access to courts to obtain compensation for the harms on them by the powerful and wealthy. The Judiciary is being perverted to a "(economic) might makes right" rubber-stamp, and is less and less concerned with Justice. The majority of dollars rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

32. Nothing angers me more than liberals who blather on with RW talking

points as if they know

[TahitiNut]

36. (cough|chuckle) Tell me about it ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1246478#1248887

[me b zola]

46. Thank you.

eom

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

12. One last point...they ADVERTISE to get the word out to victims

since corporations don't hand class action lawyers a list of people they damaged. You got a better idea of how to reach the plaintiffs?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. *Calling Candy...please come to the white courtesy keyboard*

[candy]

15. Huh?

[shance]

14. There is truth in that there are those who try and exploit the system

And I believe you are right in spotlighting the attorneys who you find advertising on every back of the bus you drive behind. To me, they are bottom feeders, the slimiest of slime because they are capitolizing on accidents and events that should not be capitalized upon.

However, with that said, keep in mind corporations don't have their in house counsels for nothing. Those guys are usually a formidable group that will squash (or settle) any case before it hits the courtroom. You may hear about the McDonalds coffee incident until you're blue, (who pays for that to be promoted on the radio by the way?) but there are hundreds (if not thousands) of legitimate cases that are either settled and/or are disqualified through a technicality or there is not enough evidence to prosecute.

[Egalitariat]

16. I've gotten coupons before

From Blockbuster, General Motors, and Jiffy Lube. Lawyers got cash; I got coupons.

[shance]

19. Coupons are always good. Haven't gotten any from Blockbuster

or General Motors though***

Haven't gotten any free trials by attorneys either. Not even a two for one or 20% off for that matter.

You must have some of those friends in high places. Yep.

:)

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. How much did you lose? How much did the lawyers invest in the case?

[Egalitariat]

38. I didn't lose anything. Which made me wonder why

attorneys got paid millions of dollars representing me in a case where I wasn't harmed.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

44. If you weren't harmed, then why did you respond to the lawsuit?

YOu had to give information to be included in the settlement.

[shance]

25. I thought you were joking Egal. Are you talking about an actual

case you were involved in?

[Egalitariat]

37. Not joking. And I didn't know I was involved until I got the

coupons in the mail. Attorneys can set up a class action suit in a manner that you have to opt out instead of having to opt in.

[shance]

41. Seriously. That is amazing.

One has to wonder how you 'opt out' of something like that.

[RPM]

49. oh boy....

look - even if what you are saying was true, which it isnt - any way to pry $$$s from the corporations who are harming persons is a win, even if the money doesnt get to the consumer as it punishes a wrongdoer.

[BuyingThyme]

4. Can it go to the Supreme Court as a states rights issue?

[napi21]

5. So explaine this to me because I do have a BIG problem with

the way class action suits are handled.

I see NO problem with people filing suit when they are harmed, and when there are lots of individual suits filed, they usually get consolidated into one class action suit. So far so good. Then comes the problem. There are a handfull of "class action lawyers" who handle these, and they have become extremely good at getting very large settlements from the companies, AND KEEPING MOST OF THE MONEY FOR THEMSELVES!

The plaintiffs end up with a check for a few pennies or at the most a few dollars, or a couple of coupons, and the lawyers walk away with MILLIONS!

I don't quite understand how transferring these suits to Fed Court will change this, other than reduce the potential settlement amount. If that's the only change, it has no effect on the problem. Big deal that the lawyers will now only get 90% of $1MM instead of 90% of #10MM.

I see not problem in fixing the class action process, but this doesn't sound like a fix to me.

[tx_dem41]

7. By "MOST OF THE MONEY" that implies over 50%...

..can you cite cases where the legal contingencies are over 50%?

[Egalitariat]

17. I think he meant that the attorneys usually get 1000 times (or more)

more than any one of the individual plaintiffs.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

28. They also DO 5000 times more than individual plaintiffs

who send in a form with a receipt to demonstrate that they were screwed by airline price fixing or some other scam

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

8. See my post above. When people enter class action suits, it is not so

that THEY may get rich..it is to change behavior. People only ever see what the law offices fees are. Class action suits are HUGELY expensive to prosecute. Their intention is not to create a lottery for claimants but to compensate large groups of people for losses while ALTERING future behavior.

People in the lowest classes of the suit i.e. less harmed make less. Class action suits have altered the behaviors of banks, airlines, Auto loan companies, tobacco companies and others.

[napi21]

9. I don't doubt that they alter future behavoir, and that's a good thing.

And I didn't say people file these suits to get rich! They are usually filed to "make the claiment whole again" after aloss or damage of some kind. There is one class action which I am fairly familiar with, where the stock holders of a certain company stock sued because the stock dropped dramatically overnight, and they claimed it had to be because of mismanagement. The end result was that the stockholders received $.30 a share, and the stock had dropped over $30.00. I don't recall the cost of the attorney's or the % the class action lawyers received, but If remember correctly, there were 11 lawyers, jointly involved in the Class action, and to have $25 or $30 million split between the 11 of them, and the plaintiffs (thousands) have the other $25 or $30 million split between them, somehow just doesn't make sense to me.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

11. That's only 2 or 3 million per lawyer

What were their costs? How many years did it take for the suit to wind its way through the courts?

Again, these are expensive suits to file and investigate. The amount of staff it takes at a law office to manage all the claimants is huge and good legal staff, even secretaries aren't cheap.

Their money isn't earning any interest while it's invested in a lawsuit either.

One would have to see the actual case to determine HOW and WHY the settlement was divided as it was.

[napi21]

22. If you are correct, and there really is that much invested in the suit,

then I think the better solution would be to forego the damn suit in the first place, and have it handled as an SEC, FCC, ICC, or other infraction. Have it federally prosecuted, and punished. If it's possible to recover any losses for the injured, then give them something. If not, the penalty should do the altered behavoir you stated.

I think lawyers are very necessary in many situations, and most of them do a very good job for their clients, but in this instance, I think they are money grubbing vultures, and are the only winners in a class action.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

30. Then you don't know the history of class action suits

Class action suits are usually filed after the government or some agency sits on their hands and does nothing or sends a corporation a fine which amounts to a slap on the wrist, or WON'T prod a company to pull a harmful product off the market or WON'T punish a company for price fixing.

Again, the majority of plaintiff's in class action suits have minimal damages such as flying once and being the victim of price fixing, but collectively they add up to lots so the suit protects FUTURE consumers as well as past.

Most class action plaintiffs merely filled out a form and sent it in. The form made them aware that they would be limited to the remedy in the suit. Had they wanted to, they could have hired a lawyer and filed their own case.

[Egalitariat]

39. Why does it matter how much was invested or how long it took?

Do you make the same argument in defense of pharmaceutical company profits?

They invest a lot of money in drugs that may never work. (Similar to a lost class action lawsuit)

It takes a long time to take a drug from the chemist's bench to pharmacy shelves. (Similar to a long lawsuit)

PhD's, chemists, biologists, and MDs are at least as expensive as legal secretaries, attorneys, and late night TV commercials.

Do you defend the high profits of pharmcos in the same way that you defend the high profits of attorneys?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

45. Comparatively they aren't high profits

Not anywhere near. And rates for good attorneys are far more competitive than rates for drugs. YOu are comparing apples and oranges economically. One is a service, the other a product.

[sadiesworld]

48. You are wrong here (or at least overbroad).

I spent several years working on class action litigation and saw plenty of plaintiffs receive large sums of money. Many class action suits involve a claims process whereby those who have been harmed can provide evidence and receive (ample) compensation for their loss.

The situations where plaintiffs receive "pennies on the dollar" or coupons usually involve cases where the case itself is about pennies on the dollar, or the plaintiff has suffered little, if any, harm.

The move to allow class actions in federal court only will have a serious impact on these suits. It is MUCH more difficult to certify a class in federal court.

While I have seen some things I don't care for in class action litigation, consumers are better off with this option available, IMO. Especially since our media and government become more corporatized by the day.

(BTW, these suits are ungodly expensive to prosecute)

[ChairOne]

18. By electing better congresspeople /eom

[shance]

24. Then we better take our votes back from the electronic voting machin

companies that own the data.

We need electoral reform, so we CAN have good leaders and not those that pay for their offices, and that means stopping the privatization of our votes by the companies owning electronic voting machines.

We need to eliminate the involvement of Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia and all other voting machine companies from our election process.

[ChairOne]

31. BBV is a far smaller problem than an idiot electorate.....

.... but sure, that needs to be fixed too...

Or to put it another way: I'm of the opinion that it is clear that over half of the voters voted for gdub.

[WillowTree]

20. To answer the original question...

....rather than debate the process, legislation such as this can only be overturned if Congress repeals it or the highest court that hears a challenge declares it unconstitutional.

[shance]

26. What about state laws? Any way they might be able to enter in?

n/t

[WillowTree]

43. No.

Federal laws trump state laws. This is Federal and the gist of it is that multi-state class action suits must now be filed in Federal courts.

Suits involving plaintiffs from one state only will still be able to be heard in the civil courts of the state where the plaintiffs reside, but only in that state. Theoretically, the purpose of this bill was to prevent attorneys from drumming-up injured parties from several states and choosing to file the suit in the courts are historically the most "plaintiff friendly", supposedly to protect businesses from the huge settlements resulting from suits filed by hundreds of plaintiffs spread over four or five states. In practice, however, this may backfire. It could conceivably wind up being much more costly to a company to have to defend four or five smaller suites in different states if the plaintiffs decide to go that way rather than to file one big suit in Federal court. That, of course, remains to be seen.

[salin]

27. Funny how trial lawyers (for citizens) are targetteed - but there is NEVER

word about CORPORATE LAWYERS which can file so much stalling and worthless paper work to tie up courts that most folks - even with good cause - simply give up. I wonder, in the course of a big class action law suit, how much money is poured into corporate lawyers coifers (given the years and years spent trying to fend off the cases), and how that compares to the fees given to the trial lawyers?

I have yet to see a study on how much tax dollars (at the state and federal level) are wasted due to frivolous motions filed by corporate lawyers in the midst of long, long stall tactics... how much money is spent based on the tying up of the court system?

I really think there is a counter issue that could win big - if done correctly - against corporate lawyers. Should we cap how much corporations should be able to pay to lawyers? Should we cap by ratio (eg size of corp to amount spent) the amount of budget can be spent (thereby earned) on corporate lawyers? Those don't sound reasonable as reforms - but there is an issue in there - how folks are abused by the legal departments - of corporations.

[shance]

29. Great points Salin***points I've really never considered.

If you're up for it, take it on.

It'd be a worthwhile action for anyone to take.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our first quarter 2005 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[Deja Q]

34. Not use those corporations? I'm assuming we're still allowed to look up

their product and conduct history... or will that become outlawed too?

[shance]

40. Oh, how I love simplistic, Republicanesque answers.....

Come on Hypno, you can do better than that.

Just turn our heads and look the other way? Keep letting the shrink the box and our rights as Americans?

Im ready for the "just say NO" coming at any point.

Don't think taking a right turn and ignoring what they are doing is the answer.

[sacxtra]

35. TWO WAYS

One way is for a FIJA to send a message.

The other way is to REMOVE all electronics, digitized data and insecured networks from the United States Of America's elections.


So if you voted and your ANALOG VOTE was digitized, you were DENIED the right to vote.

Now you need to ask the secretary of state, or poll worker for an fraud / election complaint form.

The moment your vote was digitized it traveled at the speed of light and no human can see that, or keep up with it, or audit it. Therefore your vote did not count, and since it did not count you were denied your right to vote.

[KT2000]

42. Clog state courts

one of their reason for consolidation of cases - taken to the federal level is that consolidation saves time and money. File a kazillion state cases, that would have once been consolidated into federal cases and fill up the court's calendar. Complain when they are stalled and get it into the media. Most people do not realize that when corporations fail to ante up for their abuse, the tax dollars have to pay.
How much in Medicaid is paid to people who have been injured by certain chemicals and products? Workers and consumers.
Corporations have been relying on Medicaid to bail them out for decades - now is when we make that absolutely clear!

[shance]

52. Not a bad idea***

<< How much in Medicaid is paid to people who have been injured by certain chemicals and products? Workers and consumers.
Corporations have been relying on Medicaid to bail them out for decades - now is when we make that absolutely clear!>>

Something I didnt know. Interesting.

[cap]

47. we are off topic... the topic is overturning the class action legislation.

I wonder at what point will people have been deemed to have given up their rights to due process.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Well they haven't given up their right to due process since they

still get due process in federal court even though that right will be severely compromised due to the Federalist Society's roster of appointments on those benches.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

51. BTW TOTALLY OFF TOPIC

but :hi: long time no see

[shance]

53. So, through the appointment of extremist Federal judges, we essentially

give up our due process, or Congress has relinquished it for us by approving this piece of legislation.

Which brings me back to electoral reform and in my opinion getting Americans informed on the issues facing our elections, namely what has become the privatization of our vote.

If we don't have fair elections, then there's no reason to be concerned about all the other issues, because it won't matter.