Antitrust — class actions

Listen to this article

U.S. Supreme Court

Civil

Antitrust — class actions

It was error to grant class certification after refusing to consider arguments simply because they would also pertinent to a decision on the merits.

The Third Circuit ran afoul of this Court’s precedents when it refused to entertain arguments against respondents’ damages model that bore on the propriety of class certification simply because they would also be pertinent to the merits determination. If they prevail, respondents would be entitled only to damages resulting from reduced overbuilder competition. A model that does not attempt to measure only those damages attributable to that theory cannot establish that damages are susceptible of measurement across the entire class for Rule 23(b)(3) purposes. The lower courts’ contrary reasoning flatly contradicts this Court’s cases, which require a determination that Rule 23 is satisfied, even when that requires inquiry into the merits of the claim. Wal-Mart, supra, at ___, and n. 6.

655 F. 3d 182, reversed.

11-864 Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

Scalia, J.; Ginsburg, Breyer, JJ., dissenting.