HAWAII CLASS ACTION ATTORNEYS

A HISTORY OF RECORD-BREAKING RESULTS

Class action lawsuits are an important part of the legal system, allowing action to be taken against companies or organizations on behalf of groups of people. Where a lawsuit on behalf of a single person may not be feasible or effective, a class action that involves larger groups of people can sometimes lead to results that are extremely beneficial. With a successful class action case, large corporations can be forced to alter their behavior and sizable financial payouts can be obtained.

The Hawaii class action lawyers at Davis Levin Livingston have fought successfully on behalf of numerous clients to get favorable outcomes—winning hundreds of millions of dollars on their behalf. We are passionate about helping people who have been wronged or hurt by the negligent behavior of businesses and other organizations. We serve clients in Honolulu and throughout the Hawaiian Islands.

If you are interested in filing a class action lawsuit, please contact our team now to learn about your legal options: (808) 740-0633. 

Types of Class Action Cases

There are four main types of class action lawsuits:

• Product Liability/Personal Injury Class Actions: A product liability class action lawsuit can involve things like defective drugs or defective products. If a medication causes injury in many people who take it as prescribed, or if a product like a tool consistently injures those who are using it, a class action may be in order. A personal injury class action can involve accidents that hurt many people, like contamination of the water supply in an area by a manufacturing company.
• Employment Class Actions: Companies will sometimes break labor laws in a way that affects a large number of employees. Things like unpaid overtime, a workplace culture of discrimination or failure to adhere to safety regulations can all lead to a class action lawsuit.
• Securities Class Actions: When multiple investors are injured due to negligent or deceptive behavior, such as misrepresenting the risks of an investment or misleading earning statements, a securities class action lawsuit could be an effective way to recover damages. Deceptive or misleading behaviors that lead to damages between companies or partnerships can also be cause for a class action.
• Consumer Class Actions: When a company is misleading or behaves illegally towards a large group of consumers, such as over-billing or charging excessive fees, consumers can bring a class action against the company responsible.

How Many People Are Required for a Class Action?

A class action needs to involve more than one injured person, although class action cases often have only one plaintiff. Whether a single plaintiff will be enough or if there needs to be more than one plaintiff is determined by the attorneys involved. If you are approaching an attorney on your own, as long as the attorney can expect there to be a large number of people who were harmed in a similar way, a class action should be possible. Generally, there needs to be a sizable number of people with similar issues for the case to be viable (around 40-50 people).

Benefit to Being the Representative of a Class Action

If you choose to file a class action lawsuit, you could get an incentive reward for your role as class representative. How big the reward will be depends on a number of factors, but it is common for class representatives to receive an additional amount of compensation beyond what the rest of the group receives.

If you believe that a class action lawsuit might be right for you, it is important to discuss your situation with a Hawaii class action attorney to understand your options. Please contact Davis Levin Livingston today to get experienced legal guidance on your case.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) deals with the certification of class actions. Specifically, it allows for class certification when the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole. This rule is often used in cases where the plaintiff class seeks to change a policy or practice that affects all members of the class, rather than seeking monetary damages.

Key Points of Rule 23(b)(2):

• Injunctive or Declaratory Relief: The rule is primarily focused on actions seeking injunctive or declaratory relief.
• Class-wide Grounds: The defendant's actions or refusals to act must apply generally to the entire class.
• Uniformity: The relief sought must be appropriate for the class as a whole, rather than individualized relief.

Kalima v. State of Hawaii

The plaintiffs in Kalima v. State of Hawaii were native Hawaiians who sought class certification under Rule 23(b)(2). They claimed that the State of Hawaii failed to fulfill its obligations under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA) to provide homestead leases to native Hawaiians.

The plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging systematic failures by the state that affected all members of the proposed class. They argued that the state’s conduct in managing the HHCA program was generally applicable to all potential beneficiaries, making it a suitable case for Rule 23(b)(2) certification.

The court found that the claims of the plaintiffs shared common questions of law and fact, which were typical of the claims of the entire class. The issues revolved around the state's administration of the HHCA and its impact on the plaintiffs.

The court determined that the plaintiffs were seeking relief that would benefit the entire class. This included reforming the state’s practices to ensure compliance with the HHCA. The relief sought was appropriate for Rule 23(b)(2) as it aimed at correcting systemic issues rather than addressing individual claims for damages.

The court granted class certification under Rule 23(b)(2), emphasizing that the state’s actions or inactions affected all class members in a similar way. The decision underscored the suitability of Rule 23(b)(2) for cases where plaintiffs seek broad, class-wide injunctive or declaratory relief.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) is a mechanism for class action certification when the primary relief sought is injunctive or declaratory and is applicable to the entire class. In Kalima v. State of Hawaii, the court's decision to certify the class under Rule 23(b)(2) highlighted the rule's role in addressing systemic issues that affect a broad group of people similarly, rather than focusing on individualized monetary claims. This case serves as an example of how Rule 23(b)(2) can be used to address widespread policy or practice failures impacting a large class of plaintiffs.

Focused on Achieving Results

Davis Levin Livingston has had a commitment to representing classes and groups of individuals since the firm’s founding. The firm’s wealth of experience in class and group actions make it uniquely qualified to pursue cases for civil rights, employment, construction, and other consumer claims that can only be effectively litigated on behalf of large numbers of individuals with common claims.

The firm’s partners have achieved national prominence in class action litigation. Members of the firm have argued cases on class actions before the United States Supreme Court and have authored articles and books that have been featured in national class action publications.

Davis Levin Livingston’s commitment to achieving justice through the class action vehicle includes cases that are at the forefront of litigation to achieve social justice nationwide.

Some of the firm’s recent settlements include:

• $3.2 million paid to nursing home residents who were sold recycled pills
• $2.26 million paid by Allstate Insurance for improperly setting insurance rates based on credit scores
• $1.2 million paid by State Farm Insurance for improperly setting insurance rates based on credit scores
• $1.8 million paid by Hilton Hotels for not disclosing mold contamination to its guests

The firm has also litigated cases as part of a national team of lawyers representing consumers and individuals in nationwide class actions. Its approach to class action litigation reflects its belief that each case requires the right combination of attorneys, experts, and other resources to bring cases to a successful conclusion.

Class Actions in the News

• Hilton settles tower mold suit
• Kapolei Dust Suit Settled for $2 million
• Class Action Benefits Consumers
• Coordinated State Court Class Actions: The New Paradigm
• Home Lands Beneficiaries Win Right To Sue State
• Class Action Suit Seeks Damages for DHHL Delay