Authors

David H. Taylor

Document Type

Article

Abstract

This Article explores the language dilemma created by the provisions of subsection (b)(2). After setting out the precise nature of the language dilemma, the Article discusses the arguments of those courts that have denied subsection (b)(2) defendant class certification based upon a literal reading of the subsection's language, and the arguments of those courts that have used various devices, some involving quite contorted reasoning, to overcome the language dilemma based upon the functional need for defendant class certification under subsection (b)(2). 9 The Article asserts that neither side has developed a persuasive argument for its position because neither side has engaged in the thorough analysis grounded in principles of statutory construction that is necessary to determine the proper interpretation of Rule 23(b)(2). The Article then offers such an analysis, in which it demonstrates that defendant class certification is provided for under Rule 23(b)(2).

Publication Date

1-1-1991

Original Citation

David H. Taylor, Defendant Class Actions Under Rule 23(b)(2): Resolving the Language Dilemma, 40 U. Kan. L. Rev. 77 (1991).

Legacy Department

College of Law

Language

eng

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.