Russell Jackson has a great post on class action litigation on behalf of uninjured plaintiffs, his example at hand being a California lawsuit on behalf of a class of patients not hurt by Lasik surgery (via Beck & Herrmann). It seems the surgery had gone on with the use of a laser tool that had not yet been approved for that use by the Food and Drug Administration, though it subsequently was. In order to sidestep individualities that might defeat class treatment, the class was defined specifically to include only persons who were entirely unharmed by the successful surgery, and merely, you know, wanted money on the principle of it all.
Uninjured patients of California, unite!
Related Entries:
- Frankel on Baer race quota orders
- Federal district court dismisses Netflix suit
- Hans Bader on challenging class-action abuses
- Wal-Mart Settlement Offer: Potentially Pocket Change for Class Member Participants
- CEI amicus in Cobell v. Salazar Indian trust appeal
- Opening brief filed in Cobell v. Salazar
- Around the web, September 9
- In re HP Laserjet
- Third Circuit rejects medical monitoring class actions
- In re Pampers Dry Max Litigation
- Judge Baer approves $0 Sirius XM class action settlement
- Around the web, August 25
- "Days numbered for trial lawyers getting outrageous paydays"?
- Around the web, August 22
- Aqua Dots Product Liability Litigation
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Bridget Carroll Press Officer, Manhattan Institute bcarroll@manhattan-institute.org |



