Why Bristol-Myers Applies To Absent Class Members: Part 1

By Brian Troyer (August 6, 2018, 2:46 PM EDT) -- While the split among courts over the application of Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court of California[1] in class actions is growing, the battle of reasoning has become one-sided.[2] This three-part article examines the reasoning of courts that have declined to apply BMS to absent class members. They have given a dizzying array of reasons for their decisions, the sheer number and inconsistency of which reflect their collective and individual weakness. I conclude that these courts have produced internally contradictory and legally problematic results....

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!