I have an idea for a class action suit... Forum

[Anonymous User]

Let's say you are about to start your 3L and you think you have a really good idea for a class action. You've spoke to a bunch of people who've been harmed by a certain company and you think a class might have an actionable claim.

What would you do? Try to get a job at a personal injury/class action firm and convince them to let you pursue it?

[Anonymous User]

Better call Saul?

[Anonymous User]

Is he still practicing? I thought he was managing a Cinnabon in Omaha.

[jhett]

What prevents them from taking your idea and running with it without hiring you?

[Anonymous User]

Yeah, I've thought about that possibility.

My issue is that there is no way I would be able to become the lead plaintiff right after graduation. I wouldn't want to sell the case. I wonder if I could find a few to represent right after graduation, file the complaint, enlist the help of a firm and work up some kind of profit sharing agreement with them, so they can be appointed lead plaintiff.

[dixiecupdrinking]

I'm not sure you're really bringing much to the table here, unfortunately. An idea of a class action without any ability to litigate it isn't worth much. I'll defer to anyone who works as a plaintiffs class action lawyer but it just doesn't seem like you've got a significant thing here, at least monetarily. Maybe it would help you get a job if it could show you're thinking of avenues to make money for a plaintiffs firm.

[Anonymous User]

For sure. I don't think my idea is highly valuable. I know there are class actions that are sold to bigger firms, but by no means do I think mine is that.

Basically, I believe I will one day sue a company on behalf of their customers. I'm trying to figure out, as a 3L, how to best effectuate that.

[glitched]

you trying to get your money back from Ashley Madison?

[Anonymous User]

If you post non-anon (create a dummy account if you'd like) I'll PM you.

[Nekrowizard]

Maybe you can contact your torts professor and see what they say.

[Anonymous User]

Find a professor who specializes in complex litigation on your law school's faculty. After you convince the professor that your idea is good, the professor can either (1) supervise you and have you spearhead the endeavor or (2) introduce you to his/her contacts in plaintiffs firms who can take the lead and have you assist. I've seen this happen at HYS.

[LeDique]

you should probably start by checking your state's ethics rules on what you can even be paid for your "idea"

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want to sell it.

That's a good idea to reach out to a professor. I could see some dismissing my idea out of hand, but I really believe it would pass a MTD and would pose a great threat to the company.

To the anon, I don't think I can create a second account.

[Anonymous User]

Honestly, I do think your best bet is referring this to a firm with experience in this area. These cases take far longer and require far more resources than you'd think ($50k-$100k would be a very cheap case), and the chances of you or you + a friend being able to maximize the settlement for the class is pretty close to zilch. Standard referral fee for a firm is 10% of the attorney fee. I'm not sure if you'd get paid that much as an individual law student reference, but I don't think it's out of the question. I understand that you feel like this is your case and that you want not only the experience of litigating it but the full recovery. But I think you'll find that this is more trouble than it's worth to try to go alone (or with a friend or two) and that you'll end up doing a serious disservice to your clients and ultimately also most likely to yourself. On the other hand, you stand to gain 10% of attorney fees just for coming up with the idea -- which could easily constitute a payment in the millions of dollars for relatively little of your work or time.

In terms of where to refer this -- and I strongly suggest you do so -- look to the past couple year's of the NLJ Plaintiffs Hot List for an idea of which firms are the best (and look for firms who make repeat appearances). I've personally had positive experiences with Lieff Cabrasar (especially great for consumer protection), Robbins Geller (especially great for securities), and Korein Tillery (actually seems to do a pretty broad array of non-PI class action work). There are probably 10-20 plaintiffs firms who really know their stuff and would do a great job with your case (see also Grant & Eisenhoffer, Dickstein Shapiro, Berger & Montague, Bernstein Liebard, Cohen Milstein, Hagens Berman, Hausfeld, Labaton, motley rice, and Phillips & Cohen).

[lacrossebrother]

I wouldn't want to sell it.

That's a good idea to reach out to a professor. I could see some dismissing my idea out of hand, but I really believe it would pass a MTD and would pose a great threat to the company.

To the anon, I don't think I can create a second account.

How the hell is the standard by which you think you have a "good idea" prior to even becoming a leech? How about you fucking send the company a letter explaining why you think they may have an issue and how they might fix it?

[Anonymous User]

I wouldn't want to sell it.

That's a good idea to reach out to a professor. I could see some dismissing my idea out of hand, but I really believe it would pass a MTD and would pose a great threat to the company.

To the anon, I don't think I can create a second account.

How the hell is the standard by which you think you have a "good idea" prior to even becoming a leech? How about you fucking send the company a letter explaining why you think they may have an issue and how they might fix it?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but there's no need to jump all over the OP. There are countless reasons why the OP might not way to contact the company now (including that the OP may already have). After all, it's pretty uncommon for someone to consider suing without having already exhausted some of her available remedies (like complaining to the company)--and it's not as if most companies make listening to upset consumer much of a priority. In any event, you have a messed up vision of the word if you think a consumer who has been injured or fcked over in one way or another by a corporation has any sort of moral obligation to give that company a heads-up about its malfeasance before suing.

[lacrossebrother]

I wouldn't want to sell it.

That's a good idea to reach out to a professor. I could see some dismissing my idea out of hand, but I really believe it would pass a MTD and would pose a great threat to the company.

To the anon, I don't think I can create a second account.

How the hell is the standard by which you think you have a "good idea" prior to even becoming a leech? How about you fucking send the company a letter explaining why you think they may have an issue and how they might fix it?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but there's no need to jump all over the OP. There are countless reasons why the OP might not way to contact the company now (including that the OP may already have). After all, it's pretty uncommon for someone to consider suing without having already exhausted some of her available remedies (like complaining to the company)--and it's not as if most companies make listening to upset consumer much of a priority. In any event, you have a messed up vision of the word if you think a consumer who has been injured or fcked over in one way or another by a corporation has any sort of moral obligation to give that company a heads-up about its malfeasance before suing.

Hey, actually, you're probably pretty dumb.
Dude literally never mentioned the merits of the suit, only asked about what to do in order to leverage his "idea" into a job, and noted how this stood a chance to get past the motion to dismiss stage and that it was a "threat." That last part is why I responded. There's a difference between thinking you have been wronged and thus have a viable claim, and viewing something as "likely to survive twiqbal." The latter is shady as fuck, especially for a law student.

And lol, just, lol at the thought of class actions constituting anything resembling an attempt to fight "malfeasance."

[abl]

I wouldn't want to sell it.

That's a good idea to reach out to a professor. I could see some dismissing my idea out of hand, but I really believe it would pass a MTD and would pose a great threat to the company.

To the anon, I don't think I can create a second account.

How the hell is the standard by which you think you have a "good idea" prior to even becoming a leech? How about you fucking send the company a letter explaining why you think they may have an issue and how they might fix it?

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but there's no need to jump all over the OP. There are countless reasons why the OP might not way to contact the company now (including that the OP may already have). After all, it's pretty uncommon for someone to consider suing without having already exhausted some of her available remedies (like complaining to the company)--and it's not as if most companies make listening to upset consumer much of a priority. In any event, you have a messed up vision of the word if you think a consumer who has been injured or fcked over in one way or another by a corporation has any sort of moral obligation to give that company a heads-up about its malfeasance before suing.

Hey, actually, you're probably pretty dumb.
Dude literally never mentioned the merits of the suit, only asked about what to do in order to leverage his "idea" into a job, and noted how this stood a chance to get past the motion to dismiss stage and that it was a "threat." That last part is why I responded. There's a difference between thinking you have been wronged and thus have a viable claim, and viewing something as "likely to survive twiqbal." The latter is shady as fuck, especially for a law student.

And lol, just, lol at the thought of class actions constituting anything resembling an attempt to fight "malfeasance."

Calling names = always a great way to make yourself look good and the other person bad.

Presumably, the OP believes in the merits of the suit or else she'd be asking a different question. A meritless suit is obviously unlikely to get the OP a job, let alone a job worth getting. And viewing a suit in relation to twiqbal isn't shady -- it's generally how law works in the real world. The first question any lawyer needs to ask herself before filing suit is whether she can get past a 12(b)(6). There's nothing wrong with that, and most of the discussions that I've been a part of regarding filing suit start with a "likely to survive twiqbal" discussion. It's hard for me to imagine that any firm that's worth its weight doesn't ask that at the outset.

If you don't think that class actions can constitute an attempt to fight malfeasance (I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the bolding), you need to get out and about more. Sure, there are tons of ridiculous class actions brought by lawyers trying only to make a buck. (There are all sorts of terrible lawsuits out in the world in just about every area of the law.) There are also plenty of class actions that have real merit brought by attorneys who do care.

[dixiecupdrinking]

Also, like... this stuff keeps the rest of us employed?

[Anonymous User]

Thank you, abl.

lacrossebrother, perhaps I was unclear but by no means do I want to use this suit as a way to get a job; that was actually suggested by another poster. Rather, I was asking if getting a job at a firm is a way of bringing this suit and being part of the team that litigates it.

[lacrossebrother]

It's not that surprising to me that you don't see the distinction between a non-lawyer seeing an opportunity in something capable of merely surviving 12b6 and the conversation an actual p firm needs to have.

Bolding of mal to distinguish it from misfeasance.

[El Pollito]

if it's actually a good idea someone else will figure it out soon enough

[lacrossebrother]

This is really bothering me.

First, there's a difference between "calling names" which idiomatically expresses unnecessary and unintelligent verbal aggression, and letting someone who is stupid know that he/she is stupid so that he/she reconsiders the utility of their input.

Also, just because you present moral arguments in self-serving conclusory language (see what I did there?!) doesn't make them true. The morality of seeking litigation, especially on behalf of a faceless class, is still dubious in this modern world, but also absolutely immoral from a Christian standpoint.

And last, again, there's a difference between trying to help a group of harmed consumers who might only be able to find justice if they can convince a lawyer that their cause is economically worthwhile to her--and trying to run with an "idea" that is "threatening" to a company due to its odds of being "plausible on its face" and of the sort that can be aggregated.

[anyriotgirl]

Aren't the rules about class actions expected to change soon anyway?

[Anonymous User]

This is really bothering me.

First, there's a difference between "calling names" which idiomatically expresses unnecessary and unintelligent verbal aggression, and letting someone who is stupid know that he/she is stupid so that he/she reconsiders the utility of their input.

You did the former. You provided no reasoning as to why the poster was "probably pretty dumb." In any event, "letting someone who is stupid know that he/she is stupid so that he/she reconsiders the utility of their input" is barely different and may be no more helpful than calling someone dumb because you're "express[ing] unnecessary and unintelligent verbal aggression." Either way, it lowers the standard of the discussion.

Also, just because you present moral arguments in self-serving conclusory language (see what I did there?!) doesn't make them true. The morality of seeking litigation, especially on behalf of a faceless class, is still dubious in this modern world, but also absolutely immoral from a Christian standpoint.

I don't see any "moral argument" made "in self-serving conclusory language" anywhere in this thread other than in your posts, ironically. I assume you're talking about abl's point that "class actions can constitute an attempt to fight malfeasance." That strikes me as more of a factually descriptive statement than anything else. Maybe you disagree that class actions should be used to fight malfeasance (or misfeasance -- both are correct in this context, so get off your high horse). But that's not the point that abl was making.

On the subject of the morality of class actions, how are class actions "absolutely immoral from a Christian standpoint?" (Speaking of "self-serving conclusory language...) I'm pretty on top of my Christian theology and I've never heard this viewpoint expressed, even in the most severely radical of circles. Given that plenty of churches have made use of the class action structure, I doubt that your view of their place in Christianity is universally held (or even particularly widespread). I've also never once heard anyone express doubts of any sort about the "morality of seeking litigation," whether on behalf of a faceless class or otherwise. How is that "dubious in this modern world?"

And last, again, there's a difference between trying to help a group of harmed consumers who might only be able to find justice if they can convince a lawyer that their cause is economically worthwhile to her--and trying to run with an "idea" that is "threatening" to a company due to its odds of being "plausible on its face" and of the sort that can be aggregated.

There need not be any meaningful difference here, although I'm going to wait to hear what you say re the general dubiousness of litigation before pressing this point more. I suspect we have fundamentally different views of the social purposes served by litigation.

It's not that surprising to me that you don't see the distinction between a non-lawyer seeing an opportunity in something capable of merely surviving 12b6 and the conversation an actual p firm needs to have.

Of course there's a distinction (and again, the personal attacks are entirely unnecessary and unhelpful). I just don't think it's particularly relevant. Any party interested in bringing a suit with some knowledge of the law -- whether that party is a practicing lawyer, a lawyer-in-training, or a possible plaintiff -- is well-advised to consider whether her action can survive 12(b)(6). There's nothing shady about that, and there's nothing shady about describing a possible suit as being at least sufficiently strong to legally state a claim. In fact, it strikes me as being not only a reasonable detail to add in a post of this nature (asking advice of other lawyers-in-training and of practicing lawyers), but a responsible detail to add.

Had the OP made clear that she believed her suit to be not one iota stronger than necessary to state a claim, then maybe that would be problematic. But I don't see anything in the OP's post that even so much as implies that she believes her suit to be "capable of merely surviving 12b6."