The House passed legislation Thursday to put new restrictions on class action lawsuits.

The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act was approved 220-201. It requires proof that each proposed member of a class action suit has the same extent of injuries before a federal court can certify it.

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued the overriding purpose of the bill is to make it virtually impossible for class action lawsuits to be brought by groups of people who have been injured by a consumer rip-off, pharmaceutical drug mistake, faulty product design, sex discrimination or sexual harassment in the workplace, or lead and asbestos poising.

“This doesn’t formally abolish the class action mechanism,” he said. “It’s not the guillotine, but it’s a straight jacket.”
Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) claimed the legislation is needed to curb over-broad class action lawsuits that hurt companies and force consumer into lawsuits they don’t want to be in.

“The purpose of a class action is to provide a fair means of evaluating similar meritorious claims, not to provide a way for lawyers to artificially inflate this size of a class to extort a larger settlement fee for themselves, siphoning money away from those actually injured and increasing prices for everyone.”

But Raskin pushed back, accusing Republicans of trying to shield corporate wrongdoers by making it more difficult for victims to band together.

“I oppose this misguided legislations because it sends another huge valentine and wet kiss to large corporate polluters and tortfesors, but gives the finger to millions of American citizens who suffer injuries from these defendants,” he said.

As in the last session of Congress, lawmakers folded the Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency (FACT) Act into the legislation. It requires trusts created under the bankruptcy code to file quarterly reports on their public bankruptcy dockets that include information on demands for payments and the basis for payments made.

Opponents have argued that the bill puts personal information, including the names of asbestos victims, in the hands of scam artists, employers, potential insurers and debt collectors.

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) noted that 18 veterans groups, including the Vietnam Veterans of America, have opposed the bill.

Farenthold, however, argued that the FACT Act provision is designed to ensure veterans and people who have been exposed to asbestos have the resources available to treat their illnesses. The companies that likely made the asbestos, he said, is bankrupt and out of business now.

“There are finite resources in these trusts and we owe it to our service members and to future victims of asbestosis or mesothelioma to make sure there is money there to take care of the medical bills and compensate them for their injuries,” he said.

Republicans defeated an amendment offered by Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.) to stroke provisions in the bill requiring attorneys to disclose when a member of the class they represent is a relative, past or present employee or client.

The Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act also passed the House by a 224-194 vote Thursday evening. The bill would amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures to require courts to order the plaintiff to pay any of the defendant’s expenses caused by a frivolous lawsuit.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor...lass-action-lawsuits

They are both wrong. This won't fix class action lawsuits. In fact IMO all this will do is add another task that the law firms must do, which adds costs that will be taken out of the final settlements.

Corporations will see slightly smaller settlements, the consumers will likely see smaller checks, and the lawmakers that voted for it will get additional checks from the law firms.

I'm not saying that they are crooked, I am simply saying that they aren't straight.

Besides lots of companies are making is very hard to enter into class action lawsuits with arbitration clauses in contracts and agreements.