Neil K. Gehlawat
90 Texas L. Rev. 1535

PDF Document

In his note, Monetary Damages and the (b)(2) Class Action: A Closer Look at Wal-Mart v. Dukes, Neil K. Gehlawat explores the Supreme Court’s ruling in Wal-Mart v. Dukes as to the circumstances, if any, under which a plaintiff class could recover monetary damages in a Rule 23(b)(2) class action. He argues that scholarship focusing on competing interpretations of the “predominance” language in the Advisory Committee’s Note to Rule 23(b)(2) is misconceived because it overlooks the normative policies that underlie Rule 23(b)(2).  Gehlawat begins by examining the procedural requirements of Rule 23 and then briefly reviews the Supreme Court’s recent decision as well as existing case law and scholarship on the issue of monetary damages in (b)(2) class actions.  He then identifies the competing policies at stake in (b)(2) class actions—the right to individual participation and the need for remedial efficacy—and contrasts them with the competing policies that underlie (b)(3) class actions.  He concludes by considering whether particular damage remedies are appropriate in (b)(2) class actions in light of these competing policies.