Limiting frivolous litigation

Our View

Limiting frivolous litigation

We’ve all seen those obnoxious television commercials from ambulance chasing lawyers luring mesothelioma cancer victims, patients suffering from medical malpractice and owners of defective vehicles to join in on their class-action litigation with promises of billion dollar settlements.

So, what is class action, also known as class suit or representative action? It is a type of lawsuit where one of the parties is a group of people who are represented collectively by a member of that group.

In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Typically, federal courts are thought to be more favorable for defendants, and state courts more favorable for plaintiffs.

Many class actions are filed initially in state courts.

There are several criticism of class actions. Class members often receive little or no benefits from class actions. Examples cited for this include large fees for the attorneys, while leaving class members with coupons or other awards of little or no value; unjustified awards are made to certain plaintiffs at the expense of other class members; and confusing notices are published that prevent class members from being able to fully understand effectively exercise their rights.

Now then, class action cases present significant ethical challenges.

For example, there is a situation going on right now in Arkansas where a group of attorneys have asked a federal judge not to punish them for seeking a more favorable forum in a class action lawsuit, arguing punishment would be unnecessary and overly harsh.

Chief U.S. District Judge P.K. Holmes III has said he wants to impose sanctions on 13 attorneys in a 2014 case. The layers argued, among other things, that they did not act improperly, as Holmes has ruled, because federal judges in Arkansas and elsewhere allow forum shopping and federal appeals courts have upheld the practice.

Judge Holmes ruled that the lawyers improperly moved the case in mid-litigation from federal court, where he said he worked on the case for 17 months, to Polk County Circuit Court so they would face less scrutiny and could settle the case on more favorable terms.

Holmes ruled April 14 that the attorneys used the federal court for improper purposes, violating Rule II of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, through dismissal of the federal suit in mid-litigation to seek a more favorable forum and avoid an averse decision.

Holmes found that the attorneys’ forum shopping was unreasonable and found evidence of improper and misleading conduct and, at times, bad faith.

Let us point out, one of the attorneys in this situation is John C. Goodson of Texarkana, who has won millions of dollars in class actions in his home court in Miller County and elsewhere, according to research done by a Little Rock newspaper. The news story, written by Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reporter Dave Hughes, said Goodson is a member of the University of Arkansas System board of trustees and is married to Arkansas Supreme Court Justice Courtney Goodson.

Situations such as this only give critics who promote tort reform, point out the deception of class action and cite the need to eliminate frivolous litigation good cause for serious reform of our legal system.