Tags

, , ,

Below is the first part of an article by Brent Kendall from blogs.wsj.com. It reads…

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to subject certain civil lawsuits by state attorneys general to a federal law aimed at curbing class actions, a setback for business groups.

The court, in a unanimous 14-page ruling, had little trouble in concluding that state AG lawsuits seeking damages for alleged corporate wrongdoing are not constrained by the federal Class Action Fairness Act.

At issue was a type lawsuit known as a parens patriae action in which an attorney general sues a company for damages or penalties for allegedly harming the state population.

The case before the high court involved a lawsuit by Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood against electronics companies that allegedly fixed prices on liquid-crystal-display panels used in computers and other high-tech devices.

LCD makers, relying on the 2005 federal class-action law, sought to pull the case out of Mr. Hood’s home courts in Mississippi and move the dispute to federal court instead, where businesses believe they receive better treatment.  The LCD makers said the lawsuit should be governed by the federal class-action curbs because the Mississippi AG was seeking monetary relief on behalf of state residents.

Source: http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/01/14/state-ag-suits-not-governed-by-class-action-curbs-supreme-court-says/

Marc Primo Pulisci is a Los Angeles based attorney practicing with Initiative Legal
Advertisements