D. Mass. Approves Class Settlement in Relafen Antitrust Litigation

D. Massachusetts, per Chief Judge Young, has just approved the class action settlement in In re Relafen Antitrust Litigation, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2005 WL 2386119 (D. Mass. Sep 28, 2005). Besides being a good example of a thorough Rule 23 certification analysis in a settlement-only class context and of an application of the Grinnell factors to determine the fairness of the settlement, Chief Judge Young includes a lengthy section at the end of the opinion entitled "Reflections," wherein he reflects on the development and status of Rule 23 practice & jurisprudence and its impact on the American legal system. Here's a taste of what he says:

"Born of the genius of Benjamin Kaplan, the legendary reporter to the Standing Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules at the time of their adoption in 1939, and later a Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, Rule 23 has been hailed as perhaps the consumers' most potent procedural tool to check corporate misconduct. No longer. Today, society sees Rule 23 primarily as a unwarranted obstacle to private capital formation. As a consequence, Congress has significantly watered down its potency. See The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, 18 U.S.C. §§ 77z-1, 77z-2, 78u-4, 78u-5, 78j-1 (2005); Crowell v. Ionics, 343 F.Supp.2d 1 (D.Mass.2004) (addressing the pleading requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act); In re Allaire Corp. Sec. Litig., 224 F.Supp.2d 319 (D.Mass.2002) (same); Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, Pub.L. No. 109-2 (2005) (amending 28 U.S.C. §§ 1332, 1453) . . . . In a larger sense, the rise and fall of Rule 23 is a virtually perfect metaphor for the rise and decline of the federal district courts and America's jury trial system."