Acknowledgements The Class Action Settlement Guidelines and Best Practices is the work product of over 38 experienced practitioners and experts, who devoted substantial time and effort to improve the law. Eight of the practitioners assumed greater responsibility as the editorial board, consisting of: Editorial Board John Beisner Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP Zavareii Hassan Tycko & Zavareei LLP Steve Herman Herman Herman & Katz LLC Melissa Holyoak Competitive Enterprise Institute Caleb Marker Zimmerman Reed LLC Mary Massaron Plunkett Cooney PC Adam Moskowitz Kozyak Tropin Throckmorton LLP Van Oort Faegre Baker Daniels LLP Contributors Jennie Anderson Andrus Anderson LLP Lauren Barnes Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP Sheila Brodbeck Pfizer Inc. Elizabeth Cabraser Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP Cecchi Carella Cecchi Olstein Brody & Agnello P.C. Cirami Garden City Group Christian Clapp Angeion Group David Cohen Stephan Zouras LLP Christina Diaz GlaxoSmithKline George Dougherty Shook Hardy Bacon LLP Jeanne Finegan HF LLC Andra Greene Irell & Manella LLP Gusikoff Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Victor Jih Irell & Manella LLP Joe Juenger Garretson Resolution Group Bethany Kristovich Munger Tolles & Olson LLP Adam Levitt DiCello Levitt & Rich Lewis Hausfeld Gary Mason Whitfield Bryson & Mason LLP Niki Mendoza Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP Darrell Miller Duke University Cathy Moses Irell & Manella LLP Mike Pennington Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP Chris Seeger Seeger Seeger Weiss Robert Shelquist Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP Richard Simmons BMC Group Tom Sobol Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP Todd Stenerson Hunton & Williams LLP Steven Weisbrot Angeion Joe Whatley Whatley Kallas LLP Charles Zimmerman Zimmerman Reed LLP
consider when making a class certification decision, whether for purposes of to assess a proposed settlement. Best Practice 10A: In MDL proceedings involving multiple actions that include putative class actions, the court should determine, in connection with an early and prompt initial conference with the parties, the nature and scope of the leadership structure it intends to appoint, including whether the appointment of Interim Class Counsel under Rule 23(g) is necessary or appropriate, and should specify and delineate with appropriate precision the roles and responsibilities of the counsel it appoints to leadership positions. In contemporary practice, as the result of the concentration of putative actions in the federal court system after the Class Action Fairness Act expanded federal diversity jurisdiction to include most cases brought as class actions, and the availability of centralization of such actions before a single court under the multidistrict litigation statute, the challenges presented by the existence of competing or overlapping class actions in different jurisdictions have become less acute. There may still be some situations where multiple class actions are pending in different federal courts because no party has sought MDL centralization (or because the JPML has denied it), or a putative class action that overlaps with centralized federal class actions is pending in a state court. Much has been written regarding the effective coordination by federal judges, particularly MDL transferee judges, with their judicial colleagues in related state court litigation, and such guidelines and best practices will go far in meeting the challenges of coordination where putative class actions are pending in related federal and state proceedings. Those counsel appointed by the federal court, either as Interim Class Counsel or to more traditional lead counsel/PSC roles, should be expected to coordinate with their state court counterparts in the