Russell Jackson has details; Louisiana essentially brought a lawsuit with vague allegations of wrongdoing but no evidence that their was any causal relationship to any economic harm the state allegedly suffered. The federal court decision involved the sort of parens patriae lawsuit that the SPILL Act is trying to send back to state court.
State of Louisiana loses Vioxx case
Related Entries:
- CAFA violation in Korean Air Passenger settlement
- En banc denied in Inkjet, but attorneys still evading CAFA
- In re HP Inkjet Litigation (9th Cir. 2013)
- CCAF objects to Easy Saver coupon settlement
- Cert grant in The Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles
- In re Online DVD Rental Antitrust Litigation
- House hearing on class actions
- Evading CAFA's scrutiny of coupons: In re Online DVD Rental
- Poorly-drafted Medicare legislation adding costs
- Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California
- Around the web, June 22
- Around the web, June 16
- Somin on federalism and tort reform
- CCAF objection in Stetson v. West Publishing BAR/BRI class action
- Sobel v. Hertz: CCAF objection to Nevada coupon settlement
![]() |
Rafael Mangual Project Manager, Legal Policy rmangual@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
Communications Manhattan Institute communications@manhattan-institute.org |