The Legal Leverage of Class Action Suits
Originally envisioned as a tool for efficient litigation of masses of common claims, today the class action can grant class counsel extraordinary settlement leverage and fees if not properly defended.
Goodsill Anderson Quinn & Stifel A Limited Liability Law Partnership LLP‘s seasoned class action litigators are alert to opportunities to stop class actions, when warranted, at the certification stage. We are proficient at spotting shortcomings that have prevented putative class actions from being certified, such as when multiple class actions asserting the same claims are brought by different attorneys jockeying for position to represent the class. In the case of securities class actions, we are familiar with the potent defense tools granted under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, such as pleading claims with particularity.
In defending class action claims, we are able to draw upon our attorneys’ substantive litigation experience in antitrust, employment discrimination, environmental, Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), product liability and securities law. Whether the class action is opposed at the certification stage or is prepared for favorable settlement or trial, our clients benefit from our proven experience in the underlying law as well as all procedural aspects of the class action claim.
Goodsill has represented publicly traded companies or their directors in several of Hawai‘i’s highest-profile putative class actions, including:
- An action seeking to reopen all Hawai‘i settlements of Benlate product liability claims against E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
- An action seeking to enjoin David Murdock’s “going private” merger of Castle & Cooke, Inc.
- An action seeking to enjoin Hawaiian Airlines, Inc.’s planned merger with Aloha Airlines, Inc.
- An action seeking to recover damages from a national retailer under the Lanham Act for alleged mislabeling of Kona coffee