The Sixth Circuits Rejects The "Juridical Link" Test For Class Actions

• Published date: 16 May 2023
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Class Actions, Trials & Appeals & Compensation
• Law Firm: Squire Patton Boggs LLP
• Author: Colter Paulson

In Fox v. Saginaw County (No. 22-1265/1272), the Sixth Circuit rejected a class action where multiple defendants have identical policies, but the named plaintiff was only injured by one defendant. Until recently, Michigan law permitted counties to obtain complete ownership of a property during a tax foreclosure, even if the value of the property far exceeds the taxes owed. So enterprising attorneys filed a class action against twenty-seven Michigan counties under the auspices of the "juridical link" doctrine, but only presented one named plaintiff'who had only been injured by one county.

Don't feel bad if you've never heard of this doctrine. Proposed (but not applied) by the Ninth Circuit in the early 1970s, it allows class representative may sue multiple defendants, regardless of any link to the named plaintiff, if the defendants' conduct was "linked" to the same contract or state law. Its high point was Payton v. County of Kane, 308 F.3d 673, 678-80 (7th Cir. 2002), which allowed plaintiffs injured by two counties to sue nineteen counties because each had the same practices. The key to the Seventh Circuit's decision was to decide class certification first, and then look at standing'because certification will provide class members that have been injured by the other defendants. But the doctrine was criticized more than applied, and no other circuit courts have adopted it. The Second Circuit explained the chief problem with the doctrine, asking "why a plaintiff's injury resulting from the conduct of one defendant should have any bearing on her Article III standing to sue other defendants, even if they engaged in similar conduct that injured other parties." Mahon v. Ticor Title Ins., 683 F.3d 59, 65 (2d Cir. 2012).

Writing for a unanimous panel, Judge Murphy's opinion tries to put the doctrine down for good. It...