In what is proving to be a contentious issue among legal professionals, attorneys handling class action cases are advocating for changes to a proposed rule on multidistrict litigation (MDL), arguing that it risks disturbing decades of established practices employed in their case management. These attorneys argue that the rule, initially designed to aid judges in the initial stages of MDLs that amalgamate similar lawsuits from multiple jurisdictions, is instead excessively focused on the intricacy of mass tort MDLs. Their concerns stem from the fact that these tort MDLs significantly differ from class action MDLs that predominantly emerge in fields such as antitrust, data breaches, privacy, and human rights.
The attorneys say the proposed rule is not suitable for class action MDLs. Some go as far as suggesting the implementation would introduce a degree of mismatch, reference by Jeannine Kenney, a partner with Hausfeld, that
“The rule tries to put a square peg in a round hole.”
For a more detailed overview of the draft rule, find it here.
The rule’s final approval is yet to be decided, and the magnitude of its impacts remains speculative to a significant extent. However, the lobbying efforts from class action attorneys highlight a crucial friction between the rule-making body and the practicing class action attorneys regarding how MDLs are best managed. This situation underscores the critical importance of maintaining open feedback channels among the involved parties, which will be instrumental in shaping any final rule adjustments.
For more information regarding this issue, the full article can be found here.