Class-Action Suits: Consumers' Right To File In Danger In The Supreme Court

Los Angeles Times:

It hasn't gotten a lot of press, but a case involving AT&T that goes before the U.S. Supreme Court next week has sweeping ramifications for potentially millions of consumers.

If a majority of the nine justices vote the telecom giant's way, any business that issues a contract to customers -- such as for credit cards, cellphones or cable TV -- would be able to prevent them from joining class-action lawsuits.

This would take away in such cases arguably the most powerful legal tool available to the little guy, particularly in cases involving relatively small amounts of money. Class-action suits allow plaintiffs to band together in seeking compensation or redress, thus giving substantially more heft to their claims.

Read the whole story: Los Angeles Times

Comments

[Siebenstein]

01:04 AM on 12/28/2010

You could call this "Waiting for Freisler"

[Siebenstein]

01:03 AM on 12/28/2010

The Oppressive States of America !

[teabagflush]

07:25 AM on 11/08/2010

Sometimes the Supreme Court has been criticized for sweeping things under the 'RUG'. In Roberts case this has more than once meaning.

[TokyoCalling]

07:59 PM on 11/07/2010

Can we call this Judicial Activism... You U Betcha!!!! Roberts is singlehandedly breaking down the laws and creating the new always conservative theocracy that republicans have wanted from day one.

[kinogod]

07:25 PM on 11/07/2010

Time to impeach roberts. He lied when he faced confirmation questioning. He said settled law was settled law, starry decisus, blah blah blah. Now its time to impeach him. Of course this wont happen, but if it did it would send the right chill up prospective nominees when they balf face lie to the peoples questions. Shame on roberts before hand for tjis forgone conclusion. He is probably theee most un american corporate monkey ever to hold a lifetime seat on that besmirched institution.

[seeksthetruth]

01:23 AM on 11/08/2010

Peter DeFazio is looking into this.

[TonkaTruck]

08:58 AM on 11/07/2010

Of course the Supreme Court will do away with class action lawsuits; The supreme court already ruled corporations are people; and really, are class action lawsuits fair to these corporation people who have fully recovered from the recession and are making record breaking profits?

Support all wealthy unstoppable corporations; you live in a fascist nation.

[Chicagofan1]

12:29 AM on 11/07/2010

Hope it would happens, and soon. Effing lawyers are like cucarachas.

[hrpmap]

04:37 PM on 11/07/2010

I aggree with you 100%. My wife was in the Dalkon Sheild suit, the largest steelement in histery at the time 2 1/4 billion. The lawyers took nearly all of it, for her scars ahe got 754 dollars, the lawyers were snakes in the lawsuit.

[Chicagofan1]

10:19 PM on 11/07/2010

Bloodsuckers.

[BobEvansZombie]

10:44 PM on 11/06/2010

Just another step into America being a plutocracy.

[buckeyedave]

06:11 PM on 11/06/2010

There is one very important point left out in this story. If the consumer feels they are being cheated, gouged, abused, ripped off or otherwise mistreated by a company or corporation, they can always freely cease doing business with them.
However this is not the case when it comes to the government. Perhaps we need to explore the idea of class action against the federal government.

[roads]

02:48 AM on 11/07/2010

And haven't we already seen what happens when there is not over sight...or in this case, no ramifications when companys make mistakes.

What's going to keep companys honest if it doesn't matter what they do. They'll all be ripping us off.

[seeksthetruth]

01:27 AM on 11/08/2010

Or producing unsafe products because it is more profitable to do so.

[Jack Crack]

05:01 PM on 11/08/2010

you vote fool, you can get rid of politicians. Go suck down your Prozac and Kool Aid

[ncmom54]

04:23 PM on 11/06/2010

Urge the Senate to Allow Camera Coverage in the Supreme Court

https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=2638&s_src=UNW10001ACT&s_subscrc=101105_acluo&JServSessionIdr004=4u40mcnpc1.app217a

[hrpmap]

01:35 PM on 11/06/2010

Class action law suits have become a boom for the lawyers. In the Dalkon Sheild suit, the largest settlement at the time 2 1/4 billion the lawyers took nearly all of it. 1 3/4 billion. My wife for her scars received 754 dollars, it was nothing more than a lawyer feeding frenzy.

[Lahonda]

02:44 AM on 11/06/2010

History

The ancestor of the class action was what modern observers call "group litigation," which appears to have been quite common in medieval England from about 1200 onward.[6] These lawsuits involved groups of people either suing or being sued in actions at common law. These groups were usually based on existing societal structures like villages, towns, parishes, and guilds. What is striking about these early cases is that unlike modern courts, the medieval English courts never questioned the right of the actual plaintiffs to sue on behalf of a group or a few representatives to defend an entire group.[7]

As UCLA law professor Stephen Yeazell has pointed out, the most likely reason is that the abysmally poor transportation, communications, and administrative apparatus of medieval times made it impossible for the English sovereign to directly manage the entire country in terms of individuals; it was easier to structure society by imposing obligations upon groups which were enforced by the sporadic use of force.[8] In turn, lawyers and judges who operated the king's system of justice in a society strictly organized into groups would not question the right of a group to sue or be sued because to do so would bring into question the entire group-oriented society in which they operated

http://en.­­wikipedia­.­org/wiki­/C­lass_ac­tio­n

So, am I clear that this represents changing law established somewhat before the Constitution?

[hottpotat0]

12:34 AM on 11/06/2010

the unabated greed continues

[hottpotat0]

12:33 AM on 11/06/2010

put another notch in the neo-cons gunbelt!

[Mattjoe3]

11:49 PM on 11/05/2010

.........and you all believe that voting red or blue makes one f#$% bit of difference on the path to utter subservience?

[seeksthetruth]

01:30 AM on 11/08/2010

This should show you what a huge difference it makes. A Democrat would never have appointed these right wing cranks to the Supreme Court.