FRCP/Joinder

Rule 23: Class Actions

Quick Answer

What is Class Actions?

Rule 23 governs class actions — lawsuits where one or a few representative plaintiffs sue on behalf of a large group. The rule imposes rigorous requirements because class members' rights are being adjudicated without their individual participation.

Source: Fed. R. Civ. P. 23

Plain English Explanation

Rule 23 governs class actions — lawsuits where one or a few representative plaintiffs sue on behalf of a large group. The rule imposes rigorous requirements because class members' rights are being adjudicated without their individual participation.

The threshold requirements are the four prerequisites of 23(a): numerosity (enough people that individual joinder is impracticable), commonality (shared legal or factual questions that can generate common answers), typicality (the representatives' claims are typical of the class), and adequacy (the representatives and their lawyers will protect the class's interests). After Wal-Mart v. Dukes, courts must conduct a rigorous analysis of these prerequisites.

Beyond the 23(a) prerequisites, the class must fit into one of three categories under 23(b). The 23(b)(3) category — predominance and superiority — is the most common for damages class actions and requires the most analysis. Unlike 23(b)(1) and 23(b)(2) classes, 23(b)(3) class members must be given notice and an opportunity to opt out. Any settlement of a class action requires court approval.

Key Points

  1. 1Four prerequisites under 23(a): numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy
  2. 2Must fit one of three categories: 23(b)(1) (risk of inconsistency), 23(b)(2) (injunctive relief), or 23(b)(3) (predominance and superiority)
  3. 323(b)(3) requires notice to class members and the right to opt out
  4. 4Court must conduct a rigorous analysis at the certification stage (Wal-Mart v. Dukes)
  5. 5Class settlements require court approval and fairness hearings

Common Exam Issues

  • Whether the commonality requirement is satisfied after Wal-Mart v. Dukes
  • Distinguishing 23(b)(2) (injunctive) from 23(b)(3) (damages) class actions
  • Whether common questions predominate under 23(b)(3)
  • Due process requirements: notice, opt-out rights, and adequacy of representation

Important Cases

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (2011)

Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997)

Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797 (1985)

Hansberry v. Lee, 311 U.S. 32 (1940)

Related Rules

Master Civil Procedure with AI-Powered Study Tools

20+ tools to help you study smarter. 3-day free trial, then $9.99/month.

Start Free Trial