Featured Publications

Holland & Knight's National Aviation and Shipping Transportation Practice Receives a No. 1 Ranking by Chambers USA

NEW YORK – Holland & Knight's national aviation and shipping transportation practice has once again received a No. 1 ranking in New York and the nation from Chambers and Partners for the 2008 Chambers USA – America’s Leading Business Lawyers guide. Building on over 150 years of transportation experience, Holland & Knight has the largest and most geographically diverse maritime practice of any law firm in the United States.

More

Holland & Knight Tampa Partner A. Brian Albritton Nominated For U.S. Attorney of the Middle District of Florida

TAMPA – A. Brian Albritton, a litigation partner in the firm's Tampa office, has been nominated by President George W. Bush for U.S. Attorney of the Middle District of Florida. The nomination must be approved by the Senate. Once approved, Albritton will take over for interim U.S. Attorney Robert O'Neill.

More

Search Our Library

Search

  • Printer friendly
  • Email this page to a friend
  • Generate a PDF version of this page

Articles & White Papers

Does The New “DAUBERT LITE” Test For Class Certification Eviscerate Rule 23(f) In Antitrust Cases?
 

The Antitrust Practitioner

December 1, 2006
 
Laurie Webb Daniel- Atlanta

Laurie Webb Daniel examines the interaction of four key pretrial decisions in class action litigation: initial certifi cation, the Daubert inquiry, appellate review of a certifi cation order under Rule 23(f), and decertifi cation. She shows that recent decisions do not require a full Daubert hearing before the initial decision on class certifi cation, in part because the district court can later modify the certifi cation order or decertify the class. Other decisions, however, suggest later decisions on motions to decertify may not be appealable under Rule 23(f), which permits appellate review “within 10 days of the [certifi cation] order.” Ms. Daniel argues that, taken together, these decisions may thwart the policies of Rule 23(f) by limiting appellate review of the certifi cation decision to a stage at which the record is inadequate.

Please Click Here to view the article.