Re: The Class Action Fairness Act of 2004 (S. 2062)

More | Report Post

On 7/07/04, DD wrote:
> Good day,
> I would like some feed back about this bill from the
> boards' illustrious posters.
>
> The Class Action Fairness Act of 2004 (S. 2062, sponsored
> by Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa)
>
> Thank you
DD

This is a partial posting of the following article:

NAMIC Dismayed Over Fate of Class Action Bill
WASHINGTON (July 9, 2004)—Late yesterday, the Senate failed
to reach an agreement on so-called(****my comment: Hmmm, "so-
called" Freaudian slip?****) non-germane amendments that
would have permitted the class action reform legislation, S.
2062, the Class Action Fairness Act, to be considered in the
Senate. The motion to shut off debate (invoke cloture) failed
by a vote of 44-43 or 16 votes short of the 60-vote
requirement. The legislation would allow for the removal of
certain interstate class action lawsuits to federal court
from state courts if requested by either plaintiffs or
defendants.(****my comment: Who would find this beneficial?
Plaintiffs or defendants? But thanks for including us in the
ability to do this!*****)

“We are deeply disappointed that the Senate failed to proceed
with the class action legislation. This bill had the support
of 62 Senators and this is an incredible opportunity lost,”
said David A. Winston, NAMIC federal affairs senior vice
president. “The legislation is a balanced, common-sense
solution that addresses the worst abuses of the class action
process and rationalizes procedures, while preserving
plaintiffs’ legal rights and providing additional protections
for consumers,” said Winston.(******my comment: Huh?*********)

“While a compromise on the consideration on non-germane
amendments remains possible, as a practical matter, this is
unlikely,” said Winston.(*****my comment: Gee, why would that
be?****)

Currently, plaintiffs and their attorneys are taking
advantage of a loophole in jurisdictional rules in order to
keep large, nationwide class actions out of federal courts
where they are more appropriate.(****my comment: Can anyone
site numerous specific provable instances of this abuse by
plaintiffs?*****) The class-action measure would require that
most such multi-plaintiff lawsuits be filed in federal court,
shifting them away from state courts, some of which have
become famous for large settlements with little for class
members and big fees for the trial lawyers that filed the
cases.(*****my comment: Forgot to mention the businesses that
have been forced to stop a particular unethical practice, so
multitudes more are not harmed by their behavior. Minor
detail!*****)

“We realize that time is now running out; however, NAMIC
remains committed to passing class action reform legislation
this year.(*****my comment: Define the word "reform"****) We
will continue to press our case with Members of Congress and
we are cautiously optimistic (****my comment: We all know
what "cautiously optimistic means!****) that the bill will be
considered again prior to adjournment,” said Winston.

View the vote summary on the motion to invoke cloture on S.
2062.

Sharon