Judge Louis B. Butler, Jr. on Class Actions & Class Action Abuse
From Judgepedia
- Justice Butler authored the majority opinion, which concluded, over the vigorous dissents of Justices John P. Wilcox and David T. Prosser amongst other things, (1) that because the plaintiff cannot prove the specific type of white lead carbonate he ingested, he need only prove that the Pigment Manufacturers produced or marketed white lead carbonate for use during the relevant time period: the duration of the houses' existence; and (2) Once [the plaintiff] makes a prima facie case under either claim, the burden of proof shifts to each defendant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that it did not produce or market white lead carbonate either during the relevant time period or in the geographical market where the house is located. The Majority further opined that, if relevant records do not exist that can substantiate either defense, “we believe that the equities of [white lead carbonate] cases favor placing the consequences on the [Pigment Manufacturers].”
- Justice Louis Butler authored the majority opinion, which, over the vigorous dissents of Justices John P. Wilcox and David T. Prosser, concluded that Retail buyer of used automobile was entitled to award of "reasonable costs," in pursuing claim under statute prohibiting unsavory practices in the retail sale or lease of a motor vehicle, and not just “taxable costs” as specified in the rule actually governing the matter in civil actions, even though such costs would possibly exceed the total recovery under the statute. The dissent heavily criticized the Majority decision, noting that it ignored the plain-language of the statute in order to obtain a plaintiff-friendly result.
