InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 484
Posts 61012
Boards Moderated 18
Alias Born 09/20/2001

Re: stocker11 post# 128435

Thursday, 08/11/2011 9:15:31 AM

Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:15:31 AM

Post# of 312016
The legal jargon for the class action starts on page 17 of the complaint. It alleges "The members of the class are so numerous that joinder of the members is impracticable."

This is the qualifying standard for a class action. It is up to the judge to decide if this statement is true and certify or deny the "class" of plaintiffs.

A. Numerosity: Although seldom dispositive, the numerosity requirement
has long been thought to impose a bottom line on class certification that was in the range
of 20 to 40 class members. Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 784 F. 2d 1546, 1553
(11th Cir. 1986). The United States Supreme Court has imposed a minimum limit of 15
class members.



http://www.beasleyallen.com/webfiles/Class%20Actions%20Plaintiff%27s%20Perspective.pdf

Here's an interesting article:
http://www.litigationps.com/litigation_postscript_per/2011/01/count-your-plaintiffs-before-certification-hatches-because-class-size-matters-in-ways-you-might-not-.html

The weakness of the current plaintiff's case is one reason why there are so many trolls out there. It wouldn't take much of a claim to beat out the current one for lead plaintiff status, but the big question is how hard is it going to be to come up with enough dissatisfied JBII investors to make up a "class".

IMO - number of plaintiffs won't be significant, RockTenn agreement also helps in that regard.