Document: 445 U.S. 326 100 S.Ct. 1166 63 L.Ed.2d 427 DEPOSIT GUARANTY NATIONAL BANK, JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI, Petitioner,v.Robert L. ROPER et al. No. 78-904. Argued Oct. 2, 1979. Decided March 19, 1980. Rehearing Denied May 12, See 446 947, 2177. Syllabus Respondents, holders of credit cards issued by petitioner bank, sued for damages in Federal District Court, seeking to represent both their own interests and those a class similarly situated card customers. The complaint, based on the National Bank Act, alleged that usurious finance charges had been made against accounts respondents putative class. Court denied respondents' motion certify class, ruling circumstances did not meet all requirements Rule Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). After Appeals interlocutory appeal, tendered each respondent maximum amount could have recovered, but refused accept tender. over objections, then entered judgment favor basis tender dismissed action, being deposited court's registry. Respondents thereafter sought review certification ruling, concluded, inter alia, case mooted entry reversed adverse ruling. Held : Neither petitioner's nor Court's objections private or controversy, individual interest litigation—as distinguished from whatever may be representative responsibilities class—is sufficient permit appeal Pp. 331-340. (a) In an appropriate permitted collateral merits at behest party who has prevailed merits, so long as retains stake satisfying Art. III's case-or-controversy requirements. Here, neither rejected dismissal action claim they retained economic certification. 332-335. (b) denial is example procedural litigation, appealable after final judgment. stands adjudication one issues litigated. asserted throughout this appellate litigation continuing resolution question desire shift part costs will share its benefits if certified ultimately prevails. Thus, are entitled portion reviewed. To deny right simply because defendant "buy off" claims named plaintiffs would contrary sound judicial administration. 336-340. 578 F.2d 1106, affirmed. William F. Goodman, Jr., Jackson, Miss., petitioner. Champ Lyons, Mobile, Ala., respondents. Mr. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. 1 We granted certiorari decide whether amounts claimed capacities, followed tender, objection, moots terminates 2 * "BankAmericard" plan Deposit Guaranty Bank, bank United States Southern Mississippi, aggrieved complaint some 90,000 other Mississippi holders. 3 Respondents' cause was provisions Rev.Stat. §§ 5197, 5198, amended, 12 U.S.C. 85, 86. Section 85 permits banks within coverage Act charge "at rate allowed laws State, Territory, where located." higher than "knowingly" charged, § 86 allows person paid unlawful recover twice total paid.1 4 modern phenomenon systems largely dependent computers, which perform myriad accounting functions required transaction customer's account. case, bank's computer programmed that, billing date, it added charges, subtracted credits, any due under BankAmericard plan, prepared customers' statements. During period question, monthly service 11/2% unpaid balance However, customers were 30 days pay without charge. If payment received time, next bill prior bill, shown new balance. actual customer varied depending stream transactions repayment selected. addition, effective annual vary same assessed no matter when charged occurred 30-60-day date. This certain resulting allegedly exceeded law. 5 23(b)(3).2 order denying discretionary pursuant 28 1292(b); proceedings stayed pending possible 6 Fifth Circuit appeal. plaintiff, form "Offer Defendants Enter Judgment Consent Without Waiver Defenses Admission Liability," recovered. Roper Hudgins $889.42 $423.54, respectively, including legal court costs. declined counteroffer attempted reserve bank. 7 Based offer, favor, action. into registry court, remains. At time member intervene either litigate It appears statute limitations run unnamed members.3 8 When Appeals, argued favor. rejecting contention, relied Airlines, Inc. v. McDonald, 432 385, 97 2464, 53 423 (1977), we held intervention, before statutory run. Consurve, Inc., 1106 (CA5 1978). Two members panel read 23 providing fiduciary-type obligation act capacity behalf outset appealing view, also responsibility ensure suit prejudice members. One panel, concurring specially, limited mootness i. e., filing mere offer settlement plaintiffs, acceptance, does moot controversy prevent 9 Having argument, reviewed question. concluded requisites satisfied accordingly ruling; remanded with directions further proceedings. 10 Certiorari holdings writ, mootness, resolve conflicting Courts Appeals.4 440 945, 99 1421, 59 633. II 11 begin identifying considered questions touching justiciability presented class-action context. First plaintiffs: personal substantive related litigants federal employ device pursue claims. A separate consideration, distinct interests, collective implicated: rights potential intervenors, district protect absent integrity process monitoring actions parties it. distinguish among these interests. view bearing should allowed. These diverse interrelated, them purposes analysis, conclude narrow requires consideration only plaintiffs. A. 13 critical inquiry, now turn, became reason capacities levied violation Their suffered damage result illegal acts requirement III Constitution. 14 As civil exercised option cardholder assert 23. framework clear. litigant only, ancillary Should become sense, example, jurisdiction 15 factual context arises important. case; instead, consent continued objections.5 plaintiffs' Although sense upon satisfaction final, unappealable judgment, decision "final" absolutely until Nor confession defendants less entire appealable. can assume fully preclude aspect judgment; however, follow circumstance terminate take issue 16 Congress vested courts appeals decisions courts. 1291. Ordinarily, exercise therefrom. receives he generally affording relief cannot Public Service Comm'n Brashear Freight Lines, 306 204, 480, 83 L.Ed. 806 (1939); New York Telephone Co. Maltbie, 291 645, 54 443, 78 1041 (1934); Corning Troy Iron & Nail Factory, How. 451, 768 (1854); J. Moore, Practice ¶ 203.06 (2d ed. 1975). rule practice, derived statutes granting historic practices courts; source jurisdictional III. III.6 17 An illustration principle practice Electrical Fittings Corp. Thomas Betts Co., 307 241, 860, 1263 (1939). petitioners infringement patent. such suit, defense prevail successfully attacking validity patent defending infringement. decree adjudged valid failure prove much adjudicated valid. filed dismiss "based ground raise already fact [petitioners] entitled." 403, 404 (CA2 1938). subsequent suits, estoppel otherwise, influence patent's validity. On here, effect litigation. Nevertheless, unanimous reform decree: 18 "A his purpose obtaining findings deems erroneous necessary support decree. But here itself purports adjudge [the patent], though immaterial disposition cause, think eliminated, jurisdiction, has, entertain passing direct reformation decree." U.S., 242, S.Ct., 861 (footnotes omitted). 19 function decree, holding relevant instant notwithstanding petitioners. it, yet policy considerations outcome, still live perceived distinction between definitive ousts intermediate stage cases appeal.7 B 20 judgment.8 Fittings, outcome hold error, controversy. 21 appellant's maintained retain n. 6, supra. once given setting aside what concern success unspecified future impaired stare decisis collateral-estoppel application supplied secured eliminating reformed, unreviewable put end mooting Here remand different pattern, governed principles. 22 say definitively returns Petitioner liability respondents, appear regard "nuisance settlement." never accepted Cf. Cover Schwartz, 133 541 1942). accepting set Appeals. need speculate correctness first instance, withdraw Perhaps thought open doubt, stated past, extended discussion, "an subject plaintiff . ." Coopers Lybrand Livesay, 437 463, 469, 98 2454, 2458, 57 351 (1978). unanimously advanced prejudgment right, came "collateral order" exception final-judgment rule. appealability important ingredient our Livesay. For proposition, cited (1977). That involved, this, plaintiff. McDonald assumed 24 use procedure substantial advantages plaintiffs; motivate bring reasons might brought otherwise.9 Plainly there growth stimulated contingent-fee agreements enlargement role type fee arrangement played vindicating individuals otherwise consider worth candle embark optimum more consumed cost. prospect arrangements offers well attorneys.10 better worse, financial incentive profession natural outgrowth increasing reliance "private attorney general" vindication rights; obviously development facilitated 25 aggregation classwide evolutionary response existence injuries unremedied regulatory government. Where economically feasible obtain traditional multiplicity small suits damages, persons redress unless device. misuse mechanism obvious. Its often nominal symbolic, becoming chief beneficiaries. remedy abuses lie re-examination untoward consequences. 26 most significant rendered proceedings.11 Requiring multiple actions, effectively "picked defendant's affirmative obtained, frustrate objectives actions; moreover invite waste resources stimulating successive others claiming aggrievement. forestall accomplished tendering Permitting ruling—either minimizes problems raised "forum shopping" classepresentatives attempting locate judge sympathetic actions. 27 local state rather forum justify ignoring overall problem wise resources. Such irrelevant determination latitude formulating standards govern rulings even though, determine absolute finality thus, indirectly, moot. record class12—is 29 Affirmed. REHNQUIST, concurring. 31 I write briefly seems me differences Parole Geraghty, 388, 1202, 479, allow Geraghty writing clean slate, today cleaned slate successful principles replace seem muddled inconsistent ones past. Compare Sosna Iowa, 419 393, 95 553, 42 532 (1975), Franks Bowman Transportation 424 747, 96 1251, 47 444 (1976); 2469, Pasadena City Bd. Education Spangler, 424, 430, 2697, 2702, 49 599 470, 15, 2459, (1978), Indianapolis School Comm'rs Jacobs, 420 128, 848, 43 74 (1975); Geraghty. 32 Article III, precedents supra, require remaining, intervenors supply interest, "narrow cases" "distinctly 'capable repetition, evading review.' " Gerstein Pugh, 103, 110, 11, 854, 861, (1975). facts contrast, fit permitting continuation 33 distinguishing feature unaccepted representative's claim. adopts proceed So requisite adversity continues. Acceptance mandated since offered requested (i. class) give practical power make unreviewable. Since retained, fits lead "reality" "otherwise evade review," provide maintenance Sosna, 402, 559, 11; Gerstein, Accordingly, join POWELL's dissent 34 STEVENS, 35 dissenting POWELL states erroneously intervene, "are arguably present court." Post, 346. position apparently notion (and thus liable costs, bound etc.), "present" purpose. respectfully disagree. my opinion, proper filed, least jurisdiction. fails believe remain viability words used depend judge's initial answer question; rather, depends certified.1 36 plaintiff's lawsuit eliminated,2 remaining adversary unnamed.3 Rather, continues determination. East Texas Motor System, Rodriguez, 431 395, 403-406, 1891, 1896-1898, 52 453; 407, 1214, 479. clearly remained representatives purpose.4 37 therefore 38 BLACKMUN, 39 concur because, agree litigated just mooted. limit motion, situations possibility able attorney's fees fund awarded 40 POWELL, whom STEWART joins, dissenting. 41 two law.1 They late 1971 plus penalty equal amount, totals $683.30 $322.70. App. 59. include aggregating $12 million. four years Seven months later, full Over Clerk No disputes everything recovered suggestion affirms finding sharing expense Ante, 334, 336. speculative sustain established controlling precedents. dissent. differences, similar respect: us derive benefit recognizes doctrine. "right 23" "procedural claims." 332. agrees "retains controversy" parties' "substantive sense." Ibid. Moreover, acknowledges familiar presents cognizable appeals. indeed dispositive My disagreement way applies case. unambiguously mootness. 44 court. Yet complaint. damages; full.2 entitle additional kind petitioner.3 abandoned completely taken names. notice recites "on situated. 63. 45 compelling evidence "individual today. evidence, routinely remedies eliminates outcome. California San Pablo Tulare R. 149 308, 313-314, 876, 878, 747 (1893); Drs. Hill States, 392 204 (CA6 1968) (per curiam ); Lamb Commissioner, 390 157 Allen Revivals, Campbell, 353 89 1965) ). entered. law clear powerless abstract proffered satisfies 46 know authority remotely suggesting differ instead dismissing moot.4 certainly true, observes, Ante 332-333. There doubt aspects favorable affect him adversely. C. Wright, Miller, E. Cooper, 3902 "of practice." 333. repeatedly, concedes, ante, 336, "throughout entirety litigation." See, e. g., Preiser Newkirk, 422 401-401, 2330, 2334, 272 constitutional limitation, impelled uniformly showing confer "standing appeal." Barry Columbia Elections, 188 U.S.App.D.C. 432, 433, 580 695, 696 (1978); 3902; see Altvater Freeman, 319 359, 1115, 87 1450 (1943); Kapp Football League, 586 644, 650 (CA9 1978); (1942), cert. denied, 748, 62 1158, 1703 (1943).5 show, affected "factual context" arises. Whatever context, asks single question: Is action? 48 Co, primarily provides little today's himself prejudiced inclusion unnecessary 337. justified Absent stake, "policy considerations" sometimes "a "stands litigated." 335, Collateral rulings—like rulings—may appealed satisfied. recognizing "jurisdictional III," "party [who] [can satisfy] III." 334; "the controversy." holds "desire expenses incurred obligation." 6; 336.6 conclusion legally supported record. 50 identify item expense, chargeable petitioner, Similarly, conspicuously vague "fees expenses" supplying essential controversy.7 mentioned apart included all. security event certified. Brief 33; 78. create obligation, future, identifies paid, approval, "twenty-five per cent (25%)" Id., 14, 16.8 customary contingent identified briefs. Yet, explained how 25% recovery counsel reduced obligated recovery. "spreading [of] expenses"9 relates obligation. expectation particularly counsel—that payable wholly 51 unidentified reconciled repeated admonition "unadorned speculation suffice invoke power." Simon Eastern Ky. Welfare Rights Org., 426 26, 44, 1917, 1927, 450 (1976). inappropriate suggested ever upon. Indeed, American bar award "injury"—if exists—is "fairly traced" 41-42, 1925-1926; Gladstone, Realtors Village Bellwood, 441 91, 99, 1601, 1607, 60 66 (1979).10 merely bystander. "[F]ederal them." North Carolina Rice, 244, 246, 92 404, 413 (1971). elementary dispose C Ashcroft Mattis, 171, 172-173, 1739, 1740, 219 (1977) curiam); Weinstein Bradford, 147, 347, 350 (1975) 401-404, 2334-2335; DeFunis Odegaard, 416 312, 316-320, 94 1704, 1705-1707, 164 (1974) 404; SEC Medical Committee Human Rights, 577, 579, 560 (1972).11 do suggest "capable review." 110-111, (1975).12 And nine filed. anyone challenged informal protest. Tr. Oral Arg. 4. Even lay dormant during seven provoking previously rights. Apart persistence lawyers, noncase sure, enlarged inherent arrangement. lawyer's larger fee, third creates Despite absence directs lawyers whose "clients" represented anyone.13 endorse practice. said "response government." 339. am aware influenced determining Constitution confers event, consequences likely restrictive fear. recognize allowing interested generate difficulties magnitude. 55 repercussions situations. involves pursues successful, attempt barred applying settled rules situation unjust. injunctive declaratory granted, obtained force membership. If, hand, permitted, reversal enable advantage assuming risk unfavorable reinstate "one-way intervention" 1966 amendments intended eliminate.14 56 commonly, arise attempts tactic cases. argues compensation jeopardize enforcement 'private attorney[s] general.' 338. argument force. predicating concerns policymaking respect adequacy available particular ordinarily best left Congress. very least, consistent giving rise Today, pauses usury. condemns usury claims,15 misplaced worst command Rules Enabling Act.16 telling pattern forced consequent administration real. addressed measures short undercutting done step authorization circumstances.17 empowered 1292(b) involve many cases, undoubtedly forgo opportunity settle immediate 58 settlement, powerless. circumstances, receive sort period. 23(d)(2). availability deterrent deliberate management tailored hand preferable open-ended approval circumstances. extent unavailable managerial powers lacking, Congress—not Court—to correct deficiency.18 judicially fashioned "solutions" legislative attended unfortunate own. Today's exception. remand, serve "quasi-class representatives" solely gain nothing participation indicated motion—if all.19 fairly adequately Nothing authorizes novel procedure, easily adapted Are seek represent? 403-404, 1896-1897, 453 currently nonexistent "typical class" meaning 23(a)(3)?20 "forced settlements" faced again precisely analogous situation, relationship here. 354, 14. tensions, arising express terms Rule, undermine policies underlying dictate reached 61 sum, solution settlements consumer departs jurisprudence.21 unnecessarily work serious injustice case.22 vacate instructions Truth Lending 1601 seq., request. found 23(b)(3) met failed establish predominance common members, superior method (1) procedures prosecuting (2) "horrendous penalty," "destruction bank" aggregated; (3) views undesirable; (4) tremendous burden handling claims, counterclaims Reversal relate back original tolling Winokur Bell Savings Loan Assn., 271 (CA7 1977), 435 932, 1507, 530 note 23(e) prescribes action: certified, "dismissed compromised proposed compromise shall manner directs." Conceivably, defined responsibility, intervention construes complete abandonment although secure certification; Plaintiffs-Appellants' Opposition Motion Dismiss Appeal Reply 76-3600 (CA5), pp. 4, 16, 17. error. inquiring patent, Sinclair Carroll Interchemical Corp., 325 327, 330, 65 1143, 1145, 1644 (1945), incorrect By doing so, decided hypothetical 363, 1117, error issue, importance fall category Livesay motions 474-475, 2461. promise savings viewed hospitably. claimants choose reducing fees, allocating Typically, proceeding exceed value totaled $1,006.00. unlikely acceptable cost, motivated fee-spreading proceeded basis. This, course, central concept propriety agreements. Overview Class Actions: Past, Present, Future (Federal Judicial Center 1977). Difficult what, any, reach questions. general agreement properly expired. members' maintain continue determined refusal erroneous, remains tension approach sua sponte 74. 599. BLACKMUN points out 400, 7, 1210, distinguishable involved improperly threshold resolved. disagree sufficiently resolution. Just status litigating find suffering would, opt out. respective satisfy ante. 340; 1212. uncertified always difficult define accurately. described "parties interest," Smith Swormstedt, 288, 303, 942; "interested parties," Supreme Tribe Ben-Hur Cauble, 255 356, 366, 338, 342, 673; "absent Hansberry Lee, 311 32, 42-45, 115, 118-120, 22. parties" regarded analyzing developed conceived orders, understand why compliance created 1966. necessarily enlarge fiduciary Powell suggests, post, 358-359 21. expressed about lost. Anyone voluntarily engages combat—whether courtroom elsewhere—must blood spilled. Jurisdiction premised 86, limits law, 1355. asked shows 13-14. prospective amended 1974 authorize, Miss.Gen.Laws, ch. 564, 7; Miss.Code Ann. 75-17-1(6) (Supp.1979). liable. Part II-B, infra. "statutory right" 333, abrogate 100, 1608, (1979). contrary. Incidental dictum discussed analyzed proposition way. Airlines concession list dealt statements, casually enunciated word explanation opinions dealing unrelated questions, persuasive reflection today, fundamental "[f]ederal mentions "[t]he accrue remand. refers point "would cost" means 9. interesting satisfactory settlement. furthered 23, access disappeared. strongest statements is: "Of [respondents] assertion includes matters spreading percentage Brief, (CA5, Jan. 10, "Demand Judgment" "[c]ost hereinabove alleged, deemed Court." 16. request clarified Paragraph VI reads follows: "Plaintiff alleges designated custodian funds Plaintiff situated, deposit suitable depository and, disburse deduction Plaintiff's attorneys herein twenty-five (25%) reasonable standards, utilized suing [sic ] State accounts." Far-reaching flow recoverable "traced" requirement. file unrecompensed Apparently, "asser[t]," anticipation shared prevailing 410-413, 417-419, 1215-1217, 1219-1220, 479 (POWELL, J., dissenting). embarked course conduct designed insulate avoid liability, test Susman Lincoln 587 866 3533, p. 208 (Cum.Supp.1980); Comment, Continuation Representation Actions Following Dismissal Representative, Duke L.J. 573, 599-600. acted pursuing client-less falls Immediate Appealability Orders Denying Certification, Ohio St.L.J. 441, 470-471 23(b)(3), must "opt out" 23(c)(2). provision "spurious" decision. Notes Advisory Amendments U.S.C.App., 430. Liddell Litton Systems, 300 So.2d 455 (rejecting borrower's action); Fry Layton, 191 Miss. 17, 561 (1941). national comply Mississippi's violate Act. 85. displaces disfavoring primary discriminatory treatment undue penalties imposed promulgated "shall modify right." 2072. Pipe Construction Utah, 414 538, 557-558, 756, 768-769, 713 (1974); Developments Law—Class Actions, Harv.L.Rev. 1318, 1358-1359 Landers, Of Legalized Blackmail Theft: Consumer Substance-Procedure Dilemma, S.Cal.L.Rev. 842 (1974). "final decision" dangers "indiscriminate" review. 474, prevents desirable, legislation. infecting troubled area. H.R.5103, 96th Cong., 1st Sess. Department Justice, proposes bypass problem, eliminate too lawsuits, creating damages. instances through name States. grant procedures. noted 346, took candid disclaimer destroy foundation predicates 336; 349, reasons, STEVENS "should purpose" "remain action." 342. derives early referred 42, 118, (1940), 942 (1854). 343, 3. achieves recognition. Under recognized. oral insufficient purposes. hardly Memphis Light, Gas Water Div. Craft, 436 1, 8, 1554, 1559, Baxter Palmigiano, 425 310-311, 1551, 810 indicates parties, others. selective "presence" "parties" present. presence requirement, content fiction. apply outside troublesome far-reaching implications bringing Presumably, assure extinguished accomplish purpose, suppose duty where—as here—the fail intervene. fiduciaries, litigate, lost? Would responsible willing thereby long-term obligations? like substantial. resolved merit careful study Court—perhaps unwittingly—creates major clientless unique system. resurrection dead irreparable injury innocent September 29, 1975, assigned [petitioner] million potentially augmented accrual interest. 47; 329, 2. destruction depositors, stockholders, community served. possibly come forward nearly passed authorized almost six ago. called equitable doctrine "relation back" toll 3, equities sides. presented, discretion slept years.

Category: 8