Abstract
This Article explores the choice-of-law quandary and its important role in multidistrict litigation (MDL) class action litigation, explains why the current approaches to the choice-of-law issue are ineffective, and offers a possible legislative solution. Specifically, Part II describes the MDL process generally to provide a basis for discussion. Part III describes the general choice-of-law rules in MDL proceedings. Part IV describes the case law addressing choice-of-law issues in MDL class certification proceedings. Part V describes the major flaws that exist when applying the comity approach or the unitary law approach to the class certification decision. Part VI offers a solution: Congress should change the MDL rules to eliminate the requirement of remand to the transferor courts, which will further consistency in class action MDL cases, increase judicial efficiency, and eliminate most of the problems district courts currently face in examining choice-of-law issues in MDL class action cases. Part VII provides concluding remarks.
Recommended Citation
Austin V. Schwing, Comity Versus Unitary Law: A Clash of Principles in Choice-of-Law Analysis for Class Certification Proceedings in Multidistrict Litigation, 33 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 361 (2010).
