Paul Karlsgodt wonders how we arrived at a system in which consumer behavior that would ordinarily be considered eccentric at a near-Grey-Gardens level -- such as saving receipts from the purchase of supermarket chicken years in the past -- becomes an important determinant for entitlement to compensation. More on water-in-chicken class action: March 15.
Want class-action benefits? Save those minor receipts, indefinitely
Related Entries:
- Federal district court dismisses Netflix suit
- Hans Bader on challenging class-action abuses
- Wal-Mart Settlement Offer: Potentially Pocket Change for Class Member Participants
- Wal-Mart v. Dukes & A.E.P. v. Connecticut
- Back Doctors Ltd. v. Metropolitan Property & Cas. Ins. Co.: CAFA jurisdictional limits
- Kabateck Brown Kellner and a figurehead plaintiff?
- Today is the AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion argument
- Big Apple v. Apple settlement: Ira Stoll responds
- Lawyers Sue Facebook For Letting Kids Like Advertisements
- Around the web, August 4
- Class actions in the news
- Told-you-so dept.: USDOT exonerates Toyota
- William Lerach's redemption tour hits the D.C. Omni Shoreham
- Canada's class action bust
- Attorney withdraws Labaton-New Mexico charges
![]() |
| 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 |



