One of my favorite blogs, the Federal Civil Practice Bulletin has this post about a new article in the Tulane Law Review by J. Douglas Richards entitled What Makes An Antitrust Class Action Remedy Successful?: A Tale Of Two Settlements 80 Tulane L. Rev. 621 (2005). The abstract (as published on the Federal Civil Practice Bulletin):

Against the background of today’s political climate, J. Douglas Richards presents the stories of two controversial recent antitrust class action settlements–the 2005 settlement of the “indirect purchaser” antitrust class action involving the drug Relafen and the unsuccessful proposed settlement of the multidistrict federal litigation against Microsoft for its monopolistic practices in late 2001. This Article focuses on specific aspects of antitrust class action effectiveness that have been problematic and controversial, using the Relafen and Microsoft cases to illustrate various issues that have engendered substantial controversy in recent cases. Richards contends that antitrust class actions, which represent progressive economic empowerment of the most vulnerable segments of American society against economic domination by corporate interests, stand at a crossroads between some of today’s most powerful political currents. Richards indicates that conservative organizations and corporate interests have expended vast energies in recent years formulating and popularizing the rhetoric of “tort reform,” which threatens simultaneously to undermine the substance of antitrust law and to stifle class action procedures that are essential to the effective functioning of private antitrust enforcement.

I have yet to read the article but it sounds interesting and I hope to read in the next few days.

Update [2/27]: I have now read the article.  I’d note that the apparent audience for this article is the Antitrust Modernization Commission.

Comment feed: RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.