Civil Procedure - Class Actions - Seventh Circuit Holds That Denial of Class Certification Cannot Bind Unnamed Class Members

Harvard Law Review, June 2013 | Go to article overview

Civil Procedure - Class Actions - Seventh Circuit Holds That Denial of Class Certification Cannot Bind Unnamed Class Members


For years, courts and commentators have struggled to resolve the problem of the "anomalous court" in class action law. (1) The problem arises because a decision denying class certification binds only the named plaintiffs and cannot bind the unnamed class members, as confirmed by the Supreme Court's recent decision in Smith v. Bayer Corp. (2) Thus, unnamed class members are free to relitigate the same motion for class certification in subsequent cases, searching for the anomalous court that will certify the class. Recently, in Smentek v. Dart, (3) the Seventh Circuit confirmed that, under Smith, prior denials of class certification do not preclude subsequent attempts to certify the same class, even within the same federal district. (4) Unfortunately, the court unnecessarily went on to affirm a decision that treated two prior denials of certification of the same class as no more than persuasive authority. (5) It also failed to resolve the dispute by reaching the merits of the certification question. (6) The court thus missed an opportunity to ameliorate the anomalous-court problem.

Smentek was the third in a series of fourteen nearly identical class action lawsuits filed in the federal district court in Chicago on behalf of the inmates of Cook County Jail. (7) In each, the plaintiffs alleged that the jail's policy of providing only a single dentist for approximately ten thousand inmates violated their rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. (8) In the first case, Judge Leinenweber denied class certification after concluding that the class failed the commonality and typicality requirements of Rule 23(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (9) and the predominance and superiority requirements of Rule 23(b)(3). (10) In particular, the court found that it could not determine whether staffing was inadequate without considering the impact of that staffing level on individual plaintiffs, and additionally concluded that individual issues of causation and damages would "encompass the vast majority of the time and resources necessary to judge Plaintiffs' claims." (11) In the second case, Judge Darrah found Judge Leinenweber's analysis "instructive," and held that the predominance and superiority requirements barred certification. (12) The same lawyers filed a third essentially identical motion for certification in Smentek, but based on the previous two cases, Judge Lefkow held their motion precluded by collateral estoppel. (13)

A few months after that decision, however, the Supreme Court decided Smith, holding that after denying class certification, a federal court could not enjoin litigation of a similar class action in state court. (14) In reaching that holding, the Court found that a denial of class certification could not have preclusive effect on unnamed class members. (15) The Court noted, however, that it "would expect federal courts to apply principles of comity to each other's class certification decisions when addressing a common dispute." (16)

Relying on Smith, Judge Lefkow granted a motion for reconsideration in Smentek and determined that class certification could not be barred by collateral estoppel, since the plaintiffs were only unnamed class members in the prior cases. (17) Treating the prior decisions as "persuasive authority," (18) the judge reconsidered the predominance and superiority issues and determined that the class could be certified. (19) Although she expressed concern about giving plaintiffs' counsel a third bite at the certification question, Judge Lefkow was "convinced that the common issue does predominate." (20) Whereas the prior opinions determined that individual issues of causation would predominate over common issues, (21) Judge Lefkow found that "[t]his case is better understood as requiring the plaintiff to prove that a condition of confinement ... is one of deliberate indifference to serious medical need." (22) Therefore, "the principal issue of causation is the systemic one[,] .

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Civil Procedure - Class Actions - Seventh Circuit Holds That Denial of Class Certification Cannot Bind Unnamed Class Members
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.