Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co.

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co.

702 So. 2d 1386, 1997 La. LEXIS 3624, 1997 WL 741489

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedNovember 14, 1997

DocketNo. 97-CC-2356

StatusPublished

This text of 702 So. 2d 1386 (Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dumas v. Angus Chemical Co., 702 So. 2d 1386, 1997 La. LEXIS 3624, 1997 WL 741489 (La. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Dumas, Marzell Ike; Plaintiffs Steering Committee; —Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court, Div.“C”, No. 92-1707; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 30392-CW.

ORDER

WRIT GRANTED WITH ORDER. Pursuant to Article 592 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, the class representatives in a class action must “fairly insure the adequate representation of all members.” La. Code Civ.PROCANN. art. 592 (West 1960). In our view, this objective cannot be assured through a random selection process. Therefore, the provision in the July 25, 1997 Case Management Order, which designated that twenty-five class representatives would be randomly chosen from the entire class membership to represent the class, is hereby vacated and set aside. The matter is remanded to the district court judge, who is ordered to review the relevant features of the case, such as the nature and scope of claimed damages and any designated subclasses, and then to select the class representatives in a manner that will ensure adequate class representation.

VICTORY, J., not on panel; recused.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Dumas, Marzell Ike; Plaintiffs Steering Committee; —Plaintiffs); applying for supervisory and/or remedial writ; Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court, Div.“C”, No. 92-1707; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 30392-CW.

ORDER

WRIT GRANTED WITH ORDER. Pursuant to Article 592 of the Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure, the class representatives in a class action must “fairly insure the adequate representation of all members.” La. Code Civ.PROCANN. art. 592 (West 1960). In our view, this objective cannot be assured through a random selection process. Therefore, the provision in the July 25, 1997 Case Management Order, which designated that twenty-five class representatives would be randomly chosen from the entire class membership to represent the class, is hereby vacated and set aside. The matter is remanded to the district court judge, who is ordered to review the relevant features of the case, such as the nature and scope of claimed damages and any designated subclasses, and then to select the class representatives in a manner that will ensure adequate class representation.

VICTORY, J., not on panel; recused.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

702 So. 2d 1386, 1997 La. LEXIS 3624, 1997 WL 741489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dumas-v-angus-chemical-co-la-1997.