When New York federal Judge Jack B. Weinstein certified a nationwide class action in the “light” cigarette litigation, he proposed a “fluid recovery” of damages — whereby a jury would decide aggregate liability and aggregate compensation, and damages to individual plaintiffs would later be distributed through a simplified proof process. Bryan Cave’s Philip E. Karmel (pictured) and Peter R. Paden analyze the rationale behind Weinstein’s proposal and explain why defendants are arguing strenuously against it.
Popularity: 24% [?]
Posted on Friday, January 5th, 2007. Filed under: Business Law, Law Misc
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Rate This Post - Vote Now!