Opinion ID: 483628
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Risk of Duplicative Recovery

Text: 35 The risk to be avoided under this factor is that potential plaintiffs may be in a position to assert conflicting claims to a common fund ... thereby creating the danger of multiple liability for the fund. Id. at 544, 103 S.Ct. at 912. 36 The district court held that there is clearly a danger of duplication of evidence, facts, and damages due to the pending suit by the vessel owners in Gann alleging the same violations against the same canneries as alleged in this case. The canneries argue that this duplicative recovery was conceded by the class members in district court. There, they attempted to consolidate with Gann and argued that identical conduct by the same defendant (the canneries) is being complained of in each action and if consolidation was not allowed, double recovery would occur. The class members, on the other hand, contend that there is no danger of duplicative recovery because the Gann plaintiffs do not represent all the vessels on which the crewmembers have worked. This argument, however, does not dispose of the potential for at least some double recovery if we allow the class members to bring suit.