For all the hyperbole of how Wal-Mart v. Dukes closed the door of the courthouse to employment plaintiffs, it just ain't so: it only affected one implausible theory of disparate-impact liability and the tendency of some courts to certify classes even when doing so was wildly inappropriate. Thus, Reuters discovers that many employment class actions are proceeding apace after the Wal-Mart decision.
Wal-Mart v. Dukes not end of world
Related Entries:
- Prospective injunctive relief class actions and McNair v. Synapse Group Inc.
- Apple iPhone 4 bumper class action settlement
- Third Circuit argument in Dewey v. Volkswagen
- Around the web, March 13
- Plaintiffs' lawyers protect their cartel by bringing antitrust suit
- Apple class actions
- 0.1% claim rate in "successful" class action
- Around the web, February 21
- Cobell v. Salazar oral argument in DC Circuit
- Herzfeld & Rubin, Volkswagen, and Stockholm Syndrome
- Sixth Circuit brief in Pampers Dry Max class action
- "A Public Letter From the Cobell Lawyers Prompts Ethics and Harassment Concerns"
- Around the web, January 27
- Where are the aggressive class action defense lawyers?
- EEOC: discrimination against criminals is illegal
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |



