Skip to main content

US Supreme Court Rejects Challenge to Class-Action Lawsuits

Court Stays Out of Dispute Over Allegedly Defective Washing Machines

The Supreme Court on Monday turned away challenges to large lawsuits over allegedly defective washing machines, rejecting appeals that sought to place new limits on class-action claims.

The court's decision to stay out of the dispute marks a breather for justices who in recent years have issued a string of rulings disallowing class-action cases. Business groups had filed briefs supporting the defendants in the washing-machine cases, hoping the court would yet again cut back on lawsuits in which litigants make claims on behalf of a large group of plaintiffs.

At issue were class actions alleging certain models of front-loading washing machines contained defects that caused them to accumulate mold.

The defendants, including Whirlpool Corp.  and a subsidiary of Sears Holding Corp. , argued the cases involved too many individualized issues to proceed as class actions. Washer owners varied in how they used their machines and whether they experienced moldy odors from the products, the defendants said.

The class actions, if allowed, could produce "windfalls for multitudes of uninjured persons and class-action lawyers," Whirlpool said in a court brief.

The plaintiffs said their lawsuits were precisely the type that deserved to proceed as class-actions. The washer models in dispute, sold since 2001, were delivered with a uniform design defect that caused mold accumulation, and buyers had to absorb time and expense to try to fix the issue, the plaintiffs said in a court brief.

The washers "were designed and delivered to purchasers in a form unsuitable for their ordinary and intended use," they said.

Companies dislike class-actions because they threaten to impose large-scale financial liability. Businesses say that once courts allow class-actions to proceed defendants face enormous pressures to settle, even in cases that lack merit.

Consumer advocates say class-actions are an important tool for people to vindicate their legal rights, particularly in relatively small-money cases where it might not be feasible for consumers to pursue legal relief individually.

U.S. appeals courts decided to allow the washer cases against Whirlpool and Sears to proceed as class-actions, ruling the lawsuits were unaffected by a Supreme Court ruling last year that tossed out a class-action lawsuit against Comcast Corp.

In a related matter, a federal court in California allowed a similar class-action lawsuit over Bosch brand washing machines.

The Supreme Court on Monday left those rulings in place, rejecting the defendants' appeals without comment.

Article referred: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304834704579402902603942782?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304834704579402902603942782.html

Comments

Most viewed this month

Partition proceedings are vitiated even if single co-sharer is not made party or is not served in accordance with law

Cause Title :  Bhagwant Singh vs  Financial Commissioner (Appeals) Punjab, Chandigarh,  CWP-2132-2018 (O&M), High Court Of Punjab & Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Judgment/Order : 31.08.2022 Corum : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhir Mittal Background A large parcel of land was owned by the Nagar Panchayat. Thereafter, some of the co-sharers sold their shares to third parties including the petitioners herein. On 22.11.1995, respondents No.3 to 5 filed an application for partition of the land. The petitioners were not impleaded as parties.  On completion of proceedings, sanad was issued on 28.08.1996. Vide two separate sale deeds dated 28.05.2008 respondents No.3 and 5 sold some portion in favour of respondent No.6 and 7. These respondents sought implementation of the sanad resulting in issuance of warrants of possession dated 05.06.2008. Allegedly, it was then that the petitioners realized that joint land had been partitioned and that proceedings h...

Power of Attorney holder can also file cheque bounce cases: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a criminal complaint in a cheque bounce case can be filed and pursued by a person who holds a power of attorney (PoA) on behalf of the complainant. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice P Sathasivam gave the "authoritative" pronouncement on the issue, referred to it by a division bench in view of conflicting judgements of some high courts and the apex court. "We are of the view that the power of attorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (which deals with cheque bounce cases)," the bench, also comprising justices Ranjana Prakash Desai and Ranjan Gogoi, said. The bench, in its judgement, said, "...we clarify the position and answer the questions in the following manner: "Filing of complaint petition under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act through PoA holder is perfectly legal...

Christian who reconverts as Hindu SC will get quota benefits

Amid the controversy over “ghar wapsi”, the Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that a person who “reconverts” from Christianity to Hinduism shall be entitled to reservation benefits if his forefathers belonged to a Scheduled Caste and the community accepts him after “reconversion”. Citing articles by B R Ambedkar and James Massey, and reports by Mandal Commission and Chinappa Commission, the court said: “There has been detailed study to indicate the Scheduled Caste persons belonging to Hindu religion, who had embraced Christianity with some kind of hope or aspiration, have remained socially, educationally and economically backward.” The bench of Justices Dipak Misra and V Gopala Gowda held that a person shall not be deprived of reservation benefits if he decides to “reconvert” to Hinduism and adopts the caste that his forefathers originally belonged to just because he was born to Christian parents or has a Christian spouse. Expanding the scope of a previous Constitution benc...