| Bill switches claassaction lawsuits to federal courts Original Source Link: (May no longer be active) http://www.middletownpress.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12258161&BRD=1645&PAG=461&dept_id=10856&rfi=6http://www.middletownpress.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12258161&BRD=1645&PAG=461&dept_id=10856&rfi=6
Bill shifting suits from state to feds meets heavy opposition By JOSEPH STRAW , Journal Register News Service 07/08/2004 WASHINGTON -- U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., defended compromise class-action reform legislation he crafted that would shift jurisdiction over many lawsuits from state to federal courts, calling criticism "misplaced."
"The purpose of this is to ensure that class action with broad implications are heard in federal court," which Dodd said is "closer to what the Framers intended."
Dodd, however, said he would vote to filibuster his own bill if Senate Republican leadership excludes some amendments offered to the bill.
Historically, and unlike in the House of Representatives, Senate leaderships allows consideration of all amendments, whether or not they are deemed "germane" to the main bill.
"I care about the bill, but I care more about the U.S. Senate and how we do business," Dodd said.
U.S. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and an author of the original bill, brusquely dismissed Dodd’s threat.
"All this holier-than-thou, ‘we’re not preserving the Senate’ comments are meaningless in this context," Hatch said.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., had not stated late Wednesday when he planned to call for a cloture vote on the bill. Such a vote requires a 60-vote, three-fifths supermajority to beat a filibuster.
A cloture vote failed last year by one vote; Dodd voted against cloture, U.S. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., voted to proceed with a final vote.
While the original bill would have shifted most large class-action lawsuits from state to federal court, Dodd’s compromise legislation would allow cases to remain in state court if the defendant and two thirds of the plaintiffs reside in the same state.
Dodd’s compromise would also allow different awards within a class of plaintiffs, depending on the nature of their claim, and whether they are a lead plaintiff.
The legislation pits consumer advocates and the nation’s trial lawyers against business and manufacturing interests, who decry "forum shopping" in which cases are typically filed in economically depressed areas, where juries are more likely to grant plaintiffs massive awards.
The jurisdictions, and their courts, often have little or no legal bearing on the case, the supporters of the bill argue.
"While it is part of the law, it has become a growing problem in our country," Dodd said.
Opponents of the bill argue that once shifted to federal court, most cases would either be dismissed or fester for years.
Consumer groups back an amendment planned by U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., that would let federal judges select one state’s law under which to rule in a multi-state class-action case.
Joseph Straw can be reached at jstraw@nhjregister.com or at (202) 737-5654.
©The Middletown Press 2004
|
|