08-1256 Muro v. Target Corp.

Listen to this article

Civil Procedure
Class actions; appeal

A reservation of the right to appeal a class certification issue is not sufficient to permit a prospective class representative who has settled his individual claim to appeal the class certification ruling.

"We believe that the decisions of the Fourth and Eighth Circuits exhibit a higher degree of faithfulness to the rationale of Roper that there be an actual case or controversy at all stages of the litigation, including the appeal of the class certification issue. A voluntary settlement by the prospective class representative often means that, as a practical matter, the settling individual has elected to divorce himself from the litigation and no longer retains a community of interests with the prospective class. Only if issues personal to the prospective class representative remain alive in the litigation can a court be assured that there remains sufficient concrete adverseness to ensure that the class certification issue is presented in a truly adversarial manner and, consequently, will be litigated comprehensively and clearly. An abstract interest in a matter never has been considered a sufficient basis for the maintenance of-or the continuation of-litigation in the federal courts. See United States v. Richardson, 418 U.S. 166, 177 (1974); Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 739 (1972); Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 206-08 (1962)."

Affirmed.

08-1256 Muro v. Target Corp.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Pallmeyer, J., Ripple, J.

Full Text