Rule 23 amendments 


​LCJ advocated for consensus positions to achieve class action reforms.  To that end, the LCJ Class Actions Committee  submitted four comments to the Rule 23 Subcommittee and three comments to the Civil Rules Advisory Committee, which may be viewed below.

After receiving considerable input from LCJ and others, the Rule 23 Subcommittee adopted potential rule amendments on the following topics:​

  • “Frontloading”
  • Excluding “preliminary approvals” of class certification and orders regarding notice to the class about possible settlements from immediate appeal under Rule 23(f)
  • Clarifying Rule 23(c)(2)(B) to state that Rule 23(e)(1) notice triggers the opt-out period
  • Notice to unnamed class members
  • Handling objections by class members to proposed settlements
  • Criteria for judicial approval of class-action settlements

The Committee has put the following three topics on hold:  Ascertainability; Rule 68 and offers of judgement; and Settlement Class Certification. It has removed cy pres and issue classes from its agenda.
​
LCJ also submitted a ground-breaking empirical study demonstrating that no-injury class action cases resolved in the last decade resulted in approximately $4 billion worth of settlements and judgments, yet provided a mere 9 percent—or less—of that amount to class members.  A link to that study may be found below.

Supporting Materials







​