Document: 38 L.Ed.2d 713 94 S.Ct. 756 414 U.S. 538 AMERICAN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION CO. et al., Petitioners,v.State of UTAH al. No. 72—1195. Argued Nov. 12, 1973. Decided Jan. 16, 1974. Rehearing Denied Feb. 25, See 415 952, 1477. Syllabus Eleven days short a year after final consent judgment had been entered against petitioners in civil actions by the Government to restrain federal antitrust violations (which filed almost four years before entry that judgment), State Utah commenced Sherman Act treble-damages class action petitioners, which purported represent various state and local agencies certain other Western States. The was found be timely under four-year statute limitations governing suits (§ 4B Clayton Act) because § 5(b) providing whenever United States institutes any proceeding violations, running respect every private right arising such laws based on matter complained shall suspended during pendency thereof for one thereafter. District Court thereafter granted petitioners' motion an order pursuant Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 23(c)(1) suit could not maintained as action, court finding that, although prerequisites contained Rule 23(a)(2) through (4) met, requirement 23(a)(1) 'the (be) so numerous joinder all members is impracticable' satisfied. Eight this order, respondent towns, municipalities, water districts, claimed original class, moved intervene plaintiffs Utah's either Fed.Rules 24(a)(2) or permission 24(b)(2), but denied motion, concluding limitation period run those respondents tolled institution action. Appeals reversed denial represent, actually filing Held: 1. commencement suspends applicable asserted who would have parties here where respondents, were made motions inappropriate status, respondents. Pp. 552—556. 2. A judicial tolling does abridge modify substantive afforded acts; mere fact liability also sets time upon restrict power courts hold circumstances inconsistent with legislative purpose. 556—559. 3. Court's determination denying absolutely barred limitations, unreviewable exercise discretion rather conclusion law correctly erroneous. 559—560. 4. only strip its character. Since 11 yet 5(b), intervenors them participation move file their intervention motion. Their 8 thus timely. 560—561. 473 F.2d 580, affirmed. Jesse R. O'Malley, Los Angeles, Cal., petitioners. Gerald Miller, Salt Lake City, Utah, Mr. Justice STEWART delivered opinion Court. 1 This case involves aspect relationship between provisions 23 regulating courts. While question presented limited one, details complex proceedings, originating decade ago, must briefly recounted. 2 On March 10, 1964, grand jury returned indictments charging number individuals companies, including here, criminal Act, 26 Stat. 209, amended, 15 U.S.C. alleged defendants combined conspired together restraint trade steel concrete pipe submitting collusive rigged bids sale dividing allocating business among themselves. Shortly thereafter, June 19, pleas nolo contendere accepted judgments guilt entered. Four later, 23, complaints Central California same complaints, subsequently sought further False Claims Acts. These subject extended negotiations culminated 'Final Judgment,' May 24, 1968, companies consented decree enjoining from engaging specified future laws.1 3 13, 1969, treble damages claiming rig prices violation Act. brought represented 'public bodies government are end users acquired defendants' 'Western Area' previously similar actions. suits2 provision 731, 16(b), states 4 '(w)henever instituted prevent, restrain, punish laws, . said whole part ..'3 5 Government's ended suit, spare.4 6 majority transferred Judicial Panel Multidistrict Litigation trial Judge Martin Pence, Chief Hawaii, sitting assignment. transfer assignment appropriate prior concentration more than 100 out factual situation Pence. In re Concrete Pipe, 303 F.Supp. 507, 508—509. (Jud.Pan.Mult.Lit.1969.) 7 November 1969 action.5 granted. his memorandum support granting Pence 'Prerequisites action' appeared at least minor deficiencies meeting standards determining suitability 'not fatal plaintiffs' action.' 49 F.R.D. 17, 20.6 But satisfied: complaint totaled 800, relying extensive experience dealing litigation involving causes concluded entities ultimately demonstrate injury practices lower, and, further, '(f)rom actual like cases conspiracy, find impracticable ..' F.R.D., 21. December eight status,7 consisting 60 districts right, 24(a)(2)8 or, alternative, 24(b)(2),9 relief pertinent here. 30, 1970, respondents' respects imposed these behalf. 50 99. 9 appeal, Ninth Circuit affirmed leave 24(a)(2), but, judge dissenting, 24(b)(2).10 580. Finding 'as whose claims it tendered court, filing,' appellate '(i)f (denying status), legal fiction, project itself backward fictionally carry whom directed, rights they presently possessed. It cannot temporally stranded present.' Id., 584. We certiorari consider seemingly important affecting administration justice 411 963, 93 2146, 36 683. 10 * Under stood amendment 1966, 383 1047—1050, so-called 'spurious' when character enforced several, there common several sought.'11 Rule, however, no mechanism point advance potential bound judgment. Rather, '(w)hen merely invitation joinder—an become fellow traveler litigation, might accepted.' 3B J. Moore, Federal Practice 23.10(1), p. 23—2603 (2d ed.). Cf. Snyder v. Harris, 394 332, 335, 89 1053, 1056, 22 319; Zahn International Paper Co., 291, 296 n. 6, 505, 509 511. recurrent source abuse former lay some situations await developments even merits determine whether favorable interests. If evidence prospective position appear weak, if precluded possibility determination, putative chose join situation—the 'one-way intervention' aroused considerable criticism ground unfair allow benefit without subjecting themselves binding effect unfavorable one.12 1966 amendments designed, part, specifically mend perceived defect assure identified subsequent orders judgments.13 present '(a)s soon practicable 23(c)(1).14 Once determined may subdivision (b)(3),15 mandated direct best notice circumstances' advising excluded request, will judgment, do request exclusion, member exclusion enter appearance case. 23(c)(2).16 Finally, provides 23(b)(3) include received requested exclusion. 23(c)(3).17 Thus, retain option participate withdraw until commencement' allowed continue sent inclusion within confines class. Thereafter nonparties ineligible recovery else full abide adverse. 12 existed difference appeals district should termination period, initial run. ruling question, emphasizing representative nature proper.18 Other since essentially device permit individual intervention, each participating satisfy timeliness requirement.19 conflict implementation never resolved 13 difficulties unfairness which, convinced require individualized satisfaction eliminated, remain conceptual practical obstacles path holding commences determined.20 Whatever merit seeking statutory asserts 'separate cause individually meet requirements, Athas Day, 161 916, 919 (D.Colo.1958), concept simply drafted. longer 'an joinder' truly designed avoid, encourage, unnecessary repetitious papers motions. case, named 'typical defenses class' 'fairly adequately protect interests class,' 23(a)(3), (4), unless continue. satisfied purpose well plaintiffs. To contrary frustrate principal function then sole means did reach earlier precisely multiplicity activity avoid 'superior available methods fair efficient adjudication controversy.' 23(b)(3). 14 think different standard apply rely (or unaware existed) claim refrained bringing belief suit.21 afford representation active participants aware proceedings proceed During regard, action,' passive beneficiaries Not existence limits established membership has duty take note responsibility profit eventual outcome follows interest demonstrably later bar ultimate II ordered privilege intervening 24(b)(2).22 posture, status solely failure impracticable,' tolls make status. As careful '(m)aintenance behalf (the recognized probability issues respecting underlying conspiracy), lack standing representative, reasons bad faith frivolity.' F.2d, (Footnote omitted.) 16 rule allowing deprive efficiency economy procedure. Potential induced protective event unsuitable. disallow considerations vary subtle factors current court's docket,23 requiring successful anticipation viability breed needless duplication most consistent procedure permitted action.24 17 way functional operation limitations. stated Order Railroad Telegraphers v Railway Express Agency, 321 342, 64 582, 88 L.Ed. 788, periods 'designed promote preventing surprises revival slumber lost, memories faded, witnesses disappeared. theory just unjust put adversary defend free stale comes prevail over prosecute them.' 348—349, S.Ct., 586. policies ensuring essential fairness barring plaintiff 'has slept rights,' Burnett New York 380 424, 428, 85 1050, 1054, 941, when, thereby notifies being them, generic identities Within set information necessary both size conducted form joint additional intervenors.25 18 imposition circumstance purposes we establish procedures proper statute. criticisms impact trenchant, see, e.g., American College Trial Lawyers, Report Recommendations Special Committee Rules Civil Procedure (1972); H. Friendly, Jurisdiction: General View 118—120 (1973); Handler, Shift Substantive Procedural Innovations Antitrust Suits—The Twenty-Third Annual Review, 71 Col.L.Rev. 1, 5—12 (1971); Twenty-Fourth 72 34—42 (1972), interpretation nonetheless insure effectuation litigative serve. III 19 contend, irrespective inherent statutes powerless extend beyond Congress 'substantive' element conferred restricted decision rule.26 Unlike silent asserted,27 field precise provided instituted. assert, makes immune extension 'procedural' rules. They large Harrisburg, 119 199, 140, 30 358, stated, wrongful-death statutes, 20 'The create new liability, enforcement, months, otherwise. operates created, remedy alone. condition attached sue all.' 214, 147. 21 dealt invoking maritime jurisdiction liability.'28 held litigant he limit. Guaranty Trust Co. York, 326 99, 65 1464, 2079. Harrisburg purport define delineate tolled. Burnett, supra, '(w)hile embodiment creating modifies conceivably indicate intent applied sued foreign forum, written into tolled.' U.S., 427 2, 1054. test 'procedural,' given context consonant scheme.29 recognizing toll breaking ground. railroad employee Employers' Liability 45 51 seq., initially three-year 56. dismissed improper venue. Immediately dismissal, attempted bring court. Reversing determinations barred, fulfilled repose certainty period. Herb Pitcairn, 325 77, 954, 1483. Similarly, commencing inducement defendant, Glus Brooklyn Eastern Terminal, 359 231, 79 760, 770, fraudulent concealment, Holmberg Armbrecht, 327 392, 66 90 743, hesitated conduct defendant. Glus, rejected contention defendant integral irretrievably lost period.' 232, 761. contrary, strict command '(d)eeply rooted our jurisprudence.' Ibid. 24 fully IV 25 urge Appeals' reversal 24(b)(2) doing exercising abused.30 24(b) explicitly refers judge's discretion,31 '(t)he sort reviewable clear shown Allen Calculators, Inc. National Cash Register 322 137, 142, 905, 908, 1188; see Brotherhood Trainmen Baltimore & O.R. 331 519, 524, 67 1387, 1390, 91 1646. weigh competing favor discretion, reversing directed remanded 'for (to intervene).' Rather reviewing exercised.32 V 27 remains relevant Section 'suspended' matter. leads intervene. Pence's 28 therefore 29 Affirmed. BLACKMUN, concurring. 31 I concur Our decision, regarded encouragement lawyers kind frame pleadings intentionally, attract save rights. Nor necessarily guarantee 32 indicated, prevent 'through disappeared.' 348 349, 586, 788 (1944). today, press relating property transaction impaired impeded ability interest. 24(a). Such claims, therefore, invariably concern evidence, memories, prejudiced denied. Permissive judge, concludes 'unduly delay prejudice parties.' 24(b). type mentioned above preserve notice. 33 23(c)(1), maintenance 'may conditional, altered amended merits,' viewed generate uncertainty disbanded long underway. course, decide normally expeditiously. And alteration discretionary elements 24(b), above, 23(d)(3)'s imposing conditions intervenors.' Consent decrees Pipe Construction 8, 1967; Arizona Judgment' Maricopa County 87 (1969). 15b, follows: 'Any enforce (under laws) forever accrued.' section contains proviso 'whenever hereunder, suspension argued four-day hiatus begun proceedings. F.Supp., 83—86, pressed Subdivision (c)(1) provides: 'As maintained. An merits.' listed (a) 'One (1) impracticable, (2) questions (3) typical fairly class.' dated 4, 1969. 'Intervention Right. Upon application anyone action: confers unconditional intervene; applicant situated disposition impair impede interest, applicant's existing 'Permissive intervention. conditional defense main common. When party relies executive administered governmental officer agency regulation, requirement, agreement issued unduly originally filed, included allegations events occurring date allegations, still appealable 1291. Furthermore, declined certify 1292(b). 109—110. confine motions, making permitting immediate appeal Original '(a) Representation. persons constituting more, adequate may, all, sued, '(1) joint, common, secondary sense owner primary refuses becomes entitled it; '(2) object affect specific involved action; '(3) sought. '(b) Secondary shareholders. shareholders association, incorporated unincorporated, association properly it, verified oath aver shareholder complains share devolved him confer otherwise jurisdiction. forth particularity efforts secure managing directors trustees necessary, desires, obtain effort. '(c) Dismissal compromise. compromised approval defined paragraph proposed dismissal compromise manner directs. paragraphs requires it.' See, Kalven Rosenfield, Contemporary Function Class Suit, U.Chi.L.Rev. 684 (1941); Developments Law—Multiparty Courts, Harv.L.Rev. 874, 935 (1958); W. Barron A. Holtzoff, 568 (C. Wright ed. 1961). Advisory Committee's Note Proposed Procedure, U.S.C.App., pp. 7765, 7768; 39 98, 105—106. 5, supra. Subsection (b)(3) generally analogous covered 'if satisfied,' addition: finds predominate members, superior controversy. matters findings include: (A) controlling prosecution separate actions; (B) extent concerning controversy already class; (C) desirability undesirability concentrating particular forum; (D) likely encountered management 'In (b)(3), circumstances, can reasonable advise exclude requests date; not, exclusion; sexclusion counsel.' (b)(1) (b)(2), describe specify (c)(2) 143 503 (CA2 1944), rev'd grounds, 2079; Escott Barchris Corp., 340 731 1965); DePinto Provident Security Life Insurance 323 826 (CA9 1963); Union Carbide Carbon Corp. Nisley, 300 561 (CA10 Pennsylvania Insurances Deckert, 123 979 (CA3 1941); 916 (D.Colo.1958). discussed analyzed Simeone, Problems Suits, Mich.L.Rev. 905 (1962); Note, Actions Statutes Limitation: Study Conflicting Rationale, Vill.L.Rev. 370 (1968). problem reached conclusion. Esplin Hirschi, 402 1968); Philadelphia Elec. Anaconda Am. Brass 43 452 (ED Pa.1968). Second reasoning 'trap unwary' refrain instituting supposition suit. 529. observed, 'trap' relied 735 (Friendly, J., concurring). Comment, Spurious Based Securities Frauds Revised 35 Fordham L.Rev. 295, 308—309 (1966). seven 101 petition Court, question. fortiori 24(a)(2). 543, inferences defendants. estimate expected attrition difficult predict, indicated considered factor numerosity outset Iowa Asphalt Roadoils, Inc., 281 391, 401 (SD 23.05, 23—279 Indeed, commentator observed decisions 23(a) reflect contrariety meaning 'bumerous." 23—272. observes issue 'whether nonclass (is) decided reference contexts.' 7767; 104. Friendly noted, raise them. (concurring opinion). problem, minimized typify 23(d)(3) Enabling empowering Supreme promulgate rules commands '(s)uch abridge, enlarge 2072. looked 'Apart penal enactments, usually left national legislation implications. law, silence interpreted mean policy adopt limitation. (Citations implied absorption interstices enactments phase fashioning remedial spoken general framework familiar principles.' 395, 584, 743. Union, Auto, Aerospace Agricultural Implement Workers America (UAW), A.F.L.—C.I.O. Hoosier Cardinal 696, 86 1107, 192. McAllister Magnolia Petroleum 357 221, 78 1201, 1272. wrongful death. suits. overruled Moragne Marine Lines, 398 375, 1772, 339. acts what scant history provisions. Sections added 1955, liabilities established. debate House Judiciary reporting bill asked, '(A)m correct assuming strictly procedural nothing substance?' replied: 'It committee litigants. change suggested thought setting up uniform That purpose.' Cong.Rec. 5131 (1955) (remarks Reps. Murray Quigley). dissenting concludes, (as intervention) (Emphasis added.) persuasive intrinsic ruled applicability First, remedy, 20, incongruous immediately was, fact, impracticable. Second, noted previously, deny confined less

Category: 8