Vote for The Class Action Fairness Act
Vote for Cloture
It is time to pass the Class Action Fairness Act (S.2062).

The legislation was first introduced 6 years ago (1998).

Over the years, the legislation has been the subject of numerous compromises and
revisions.

The current bill is reasonable and moderate legislation that includes numerous
consumer protections, including a provision governing legal fees in coupon
settlements.

The bill has bipartisan support, with 62 Senators publicly committed to voting for
it.

More than eighty newspaper editorials have been written in support of the
legislation.
Why is the Legislation Needed?

Now there is rampant venue shopping in “magnet state courts” with record
numbers of national class actions being filed in some of these state courts.

Venue shopping results in abusive class action settlements in which class
members get something of little or no value while their lawyers receive millions
in legal fees. For Example:
  The settlement of a class action in Illinois against Poland
Spring claiming the company's bottled water was not pure.
Under the settlement, Poland Spring admitted no wrongdoing,
consumers received coupons for discounts on Poland Spring
water and the class action lawyers received $1.35 million.
  The settlement of a class action in Alabama against the Bank
of Boston over escrow accounts in which class members ended
up losing money to pay the plaintiffs’ lawyers fees of $8.5
million.
  The settlement of a class action in Texas against Blockbuster
over late fees in which class members only received coupons,
while their lawyers walked away with $9.25 million in fees.

In some state court class action cases the judges in one state are overturning laws
of other states.

The problem of abusive settlements in state courts is getting worse. Since the
Class Action Fairness Act was first introduced in 1998, there has been a 5,200%
increase in the number of class actions filed in one key “magnet state court.”
What does the Bill do?

The legislation would allow federal courts to hear large national class action
lawsuits involving plaintiffs and defendants from different states. (Class action
lawsuits involving more than $5 million and more than 100 plaintiffs.) The
legislation also contains provisions from a recent compromise negotiated by
Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT), Bill Frist (R-TN), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Orrin
Hatch (R-UT), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Charles Schumer
(D-NY).
The Compromise Bill:
  Includes a number of “carve outs,” or exclusions, to ensure
that truly local controversies remain exclusively in local state
courts
  Addresses one of the biggest concerns that has been
expressed by consumer groups about class actions — the
prevalence of coupon settlements that provide little or no value
to consumers but result in millions for their lawyers
  Says attorneys’ fees in coupon settlements must be based on
the value of the coupons actually redeemed by consumers or on
the hours actually spent bringing the case (rather than the
theoretical value of all the coupons being offered)
  Includes a “Consumer Class Action Bill of Rights,” which
requires judges to review the fairness of proposed settlements
that provide only coupons to the class members or impose costs
on them.

A study of class action cases in six states from 1997 to 2003 shows that if the
legislation had been in effect a majority of class actions filed in those states would
remain in those states courts. The study also showed that in some key “magnet
state courts” , 86 percent of the class actions filed there would be moved to
federal courts.