Assignment task: IN RE AMERICAN MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. (1996)
Part I: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS, SIXTH CIRCUIT 75 F.3d 1069
Q1. What happened on the following dates: December 5, 1994 and December 29, 1994?
Q2. At the class certification hearing, the defendant argued that class certification should not be granted because the plaintiff should not be allowed to represent the class. Discuss the arguments made in this regard and the finding of the court.
Q3. At the class certification hearing, the judge orders Vorhis to add more plaintiffs as named representatives. Describe all the named representatives on the amended complaint and their particular issues with penile implants.
Q4. Examine the judge's March 16, 1995 certification order carefully. What, in addition to satisfying the requirements of Rule 23(a), does a party need to do in order for class certification to be appropriate?
Q5. How does the trial court conclude that the numerosity requirement of Rule 23(a)(1) is met?
Q6. How does the trial court conclude that the commonality requirement of Rule 23(a)(2) has been met?
Q7. How does the trial court conclude that the typicality requirement of Rule 23(a)(3) has been met? What about the court's finding indicates that typicality in Rule 23(a)(3) is not a completely separate consideration than adequacy in Rule 23(a)(4)?
Q8. How does the trial court conclude that the adequacy requirement of Rule 23(a)(4) has been met?
Q9. Once the court determined that the requirements of Rule 23(a) were satisfied, it had,to do one more thing before class certification could occur. What was that one more thing?
Q10. What are the appellate court's findings regarding certification?
Q11. Does the granting or denying of class certification provide a right of appeal?
Part II: UNIQUE CONSIDERATIONS FOR CLASS ACTIONS DIRECTED READING QUESTIONS
Q1. Assuming that all Rule 23(a) requirements are met, what "type[] of class action" could the following fact patterns be certified as and why?
Q2. The sum of all the defendant's assets and any applicable insurance coverage are insufficient to satisfy all the plaintiffs' claims, and the total recovery allowed is based on a limited fund.
Q3. Property owners in the city of Manhattan, New York want to get a factory on Staten
Q4. Island declared a nuisance, when some of the property owners have owned property in Manhattan before the factory was established and others have owned property after the factory was established.
Q5. A civil rights suit seeking to have a municipalitfs action banning a certain ethnic minority from engaging in a certain type of business declared unconstitutional.
Q6. Heart attack deaths suffered by users of a pain medication when no warning regarding the heart attack risk was mentioned on the label of the medication.
Q7. According to Rule 23(c), what are some significant differences between the Rule 23(b)(3) class actions and the other types of class actions available under Rule 23(b)?
Q8. Motor Sellers Inc. is a New York corporation with its principal place of business in California. For the last decade, it has sold millions of automobiles directly to purchasers in every state. Five purchasers, Alpha, Beta, Charlie, Delta, and Epsilon, initiate a class action lawsuit in federal court against MSI, alleging that MSI was negligent because it failed to inspect their vehicles adequately, and as a result, defects which a reasonable seller would have detected caused harm to at least 35,000 individuals. The basis of jurisdiction is diversity jurisdiction, and they sue on behalf of all others similarly situated. Alpha is from Alabama, Beta is from Massachusetts, Charlie is from Florida, Delta is from Delaware, and Epsilon is from North Carolina. Many of the purchasers who are members of the class are from New York, California, and many other states. The total damage amount for all plaintiffs is $4.9 million. The amount in controversy exclusive of costs and interests for the claims of the named plaintiffs is as follows: Alpha $76,000, Beta $3000, Charlie $1500, Delta $1200, and Epsilon $ 1500. Which of the following statements, if any, is correct and why?
Q9. The federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the action because the diversity requirement is not met.
Q10. The federal court must dismiss the action because the claims of four of the representatives do not meet the amount in controversy requirement.
Q11. Assume the same facts as question 16, but Alpha's claim is for $35,000, Beta is from New York, Charlie is from California, and the aggregate amount in controversy for all plaintiffs is $5.5 million. Read 28 U.S.C. S 1332(d)(1), (d)(2) carefully and explain how these facts change the subject matter jurisdiction analysis.