I read this earlier and knew you'd appreciate it too:
================================================================
thought you'd like this <repost> from another board:
Re: schwab decertification decision
Thanks for the link.
Looks like the Second Circuit (which by the way isn't known as a particularly conservative court) effectively ripped the certification to shreds.
Its refreshing to seem them dismantle, piece by piece, the extensive stack of bullsh#$ that the Schwab case is. Some highlights:
Individualized proof is needed to overcome the possibility that a member of the purported class purchased Lights for some reason other than the belief that Lights were a healthier alternative -- for example, if a Lights smoker was unaware of that representation, preferred the taste of Lights, or chose Lights as an expression of personal style.
Indeed, the fact that the market did not shift away from light cigarettes after the publication of Monograph 13 is compelling evidence that plaintiffs had other, non-health-related reasons for purchasing Lights. Three of the six named plaintiffs even continued to purchase Lights after filing the complaint in this case, suggesting the influence of some other motivation.
. . .But such an aggregate determination is likely to result in an astronomical damages figure that does not accurately reflect the number of plaintiffs actually injured by defendants and that bears little or no relationship to the amount of economic harm actually caused by defendants. [ya think? -ms]
. . .Courts have repeatedly rejected the use of fluid recovery as a substitute for individualized proof when the class pursues claims that require proof of actual damages. . .When fluid recovery is used to permit the mass aggregation of claims, the right of defendants to challenge the allegations of individual plaintiffs is lost, resulting in a due process violation.
. . .we further note our skepticism that if statistical experts cannot with accuracy estimate the relevant figures, a jury could do so based on the testimony of those experts.
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and order the class DECERTIFIED.
Still, there was a tremendous amount of precedent against this case being certified. Not only was de-certification widely expected, but even Judge Weinstein, who signed the certification order, essentially conceded in the certification order that he didn't think it was going to stand up to review.
Its still not clear if this decision is the LAST stake through the heart of "lights" class actions (I think there are still a few more of those floating around out there), but its certainly one of them.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
