Opinion ID: 2438852
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Broad discretion

Text: Reporter's Note 2. to Rule 23 recognizes the broad discretion given to the court to protect the rights of absent class members and points out there is similar discretion in the federal rule. While the broad discretion noted is ostensibly different from broad discretion to allow or disallow a class action, the two are related. If the court has broad discretion to protect the rights of absent class members, that power should be regarded as contributing significantly to the discretion the court has to permit class actions, as the inability to protect class members would be a major impediment. In the Drew case, just after our discussion of the chancellor's decision that the class action was not shown to have been superior to other forms of relief and our reference to fairness discussed above, we said: It is on this point that we cannot say the chancellor abused her `broad discretion' (Note 2 to our Rule 23) in finding that the class action is not superior to other remedies. Thus, beginning with the Drew case and through the Morris case, we have recognized that the broad discretion of the trial judge extends not only to the protection of the absent class members, but also to the question whether the class action should proceed.