New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. United Gas Pipe Line CO., 732 F.2d 452 (1984) p327.
Diversity case decided en banc. ISSUE: entitlement of third parties to intervene as plaintiffs in a contract action brought be a local electric utility against its major fuel supplier. HOLD: city officials were properly denied intervention. FACTS: basically the electricity company was suing the fuel supplier for increasing its rates. The city council wanted to intervene under FRCP 24. The city had only a economic interest. RULE: something more than an economic interest is necessary. An economic interest alone is insufficient as a legally protectable interest is required for intervention under Rule 24a2.
ISSUE 2: where the trial court committed a clear abuse of discretion in a denying the motion under the permissive intervention of Rule 24b2. Permissive discretion is wholly discretionary. HOLD: the district court did not abuse its discretion. DISSENT: this is a blow against laws which allow consumers to participate in administrative and judicial decisions.
State Farm and Casualty Co. v. Tashire, 386 U.S. 523 (1967) p332.
FACTS: a bus and a truck collided. The passengers of the bus wanted to sue the driver’s insurance company. The company only covered up to $20,000 per occurrence so it sought to join all the claims into a single proceeding. ISSUE: § 1335 v. FRCP 22. HOLD: the plaintiffs should not be forced to make all their claims at one time especially since this meager insurance fund will most likely not be enough to cover the claims.
Hansberry v. Lee, 311 U.S. 32 (1940) p337.
D sought to enjoin P from residing in a predominantly white neighborhood in alleged violation of a racially restrictive covenant. The action was brought in a class action by D on behalf of the neighborhood. HOLD: since P was living in the neighborhood they had to be included as part of the class. Those allegedly bound by the covenant would not constitute a single class in any litigation brought to enforce it.
NOTES ON RULE 23 (Class actions):
Four prerequisites must be met before a class action can even be considered:
If these factors are met, then the action must fit into one of the following three types of class actions:
B1. If there is a risk that individual suits would create inconsistent results. Typical case is on involving a limited fund with numerous claimants
B2. Injunctive or declaratory relief. Typical case is a civil rights class action, in which class representatives sue to have a statute declared unconstitutional
B3. There are common questions and a class action is the superior means of managing the case.
Four factors to determine if a suit is a B3 type:
C. Also there is a requirement of certification and notice:
CERTIFICATION: the court must conduct a hearing to determine whether the class action may be maintained
NOTICE: notice must be the best practicable under the circumstances; must include individual notice; usually by mail to all class members who can be identified through reasonable effort
D. the court is allowed creativity to structure the notice and possible relief in novel ways
E. the court must approve dismissal or compromise and notice must be given to class members of these events
Eisen v. Carlisle and Jacqueline, 417 U.S. 156 (1974) p340.
Publication notice cannot satisfy due process where the names and addresses of the beneficiaries are known.
Individual notice to identifiable class members is not a discretionary consideration to be waived in a particular case. It is an unambiguous requirement of Rule 23.
Petitioner must bear the cost of notice to the member of his class.