Key Vote 108th Congress > Senate > Vote 403

Date: October 22, 2003

Result: 59-39 (Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected)

Clerk session vote number: 403

Vote Subject Matter: Government Management / Regulation Special Interest

Sponsor: GRASSLEY, Charles Ernest (R-IA)

Bill number: S1751

Question: On Cloture on the Motion to Proceed

Description: A bill to amend the procedures that apply to consideration of interstate class actions to assure fairer outcomes for class members and defendants, and for other purposes.

Bill summary: Class Action Fairness Act of 2003 - Amends the Federal judicial code to prohibit a Federal district court from approving a proposed class action settlement under which: (1) members would receive non-cash benefits or would be required to expend funds in order to obtain proposed benefits, unless the court finds, after a hearing, that the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) any member is obligated to pay sums to class counsel that would result in a net loss to the member, unless the court finds that non-monetary benefits to the member outweigh the monetary loss; (3) greater sums would be paid to some class members than to others solely on the basis of their closer geographic proximity to the court; or (4) a greater share would be paid to a class representative than to other class members. Sets forth requirements for: (1) notices of class actions to class members, including a requirement that such notice include a summary written in plain, easily understood language of class member legal consequences, rights, and benefits, obligations of defendants, and attorney fees; and (2) notices of proposed settlements to be served upon appropriate State and Federal regulatory officials. Grants Federal district courts original jurisdiction of any civil action in which the matter in controversy exceeds $5 million, exclusive of interest and costs, and in which any member of a class of plaintiffs is: (1) a citizen of a State different from any defendant; (2) a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state and any defendant is a citizen of a State; or (3) a citizen of a State and any defendant is a foreign state or a citizen or subject of a foreign state. Sets forth considerations based upon which a district court may decline to exercise jurisdiction over a class action in which greater than one-third but less than two-thirds of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes in the aggregate and the primary defendants are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed, including consideration of whether: (1) the claims asserted involve matters of national or interstate interest; and (2) the class action has been pleaded in a manner that seeks to avoid Federal jurisdiction. Provides that district courts shall not be granted jurisdiction over any class action: (1) in which two-thirds or more of the members of all proposed plaintiff classes and the primary defendants are citizens of the State in which the action was originally filed; (2) in which the primary defendants are States; (3) in which the number of members of all proposed plaintiff classes is less than 100; or (4) involving certain securities claims or claims involving the internal governance of a corporation that arise under the laws of the State of incorporation. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) the removal of interstate class actions to U.S. district court; and (2) review by appeal of orders remanding class actions to State courts. Directs the Judicial Conference of the United States to report on class action settlements, including recommendations for best court practices to ensure that settlements are fair to class members.

Bill titles: A bill to amend the procedures that apply to consideration of interstate class actions to assure fairer outcomes for class members and defendants, and for other purposes.

Links for more info on the vote: congress.gov

Loading graphics...

Error!

Member Vote Map Help: click states or districts to filter members.

Vote Ideological Breakdown Help: click and drag on the plot to focus on selected members.

This chart describes how members voted on the rollcall. Members are placed according to their NOMINATE ideological scores. A cutting line divides the vote into those expected to vote "Yea" and those expected to vote "Nay". The shaded heatmap reflects the expected probability of voting "Yea". You can select points or regions to subset the members listed above and below.

Votes Download as XLS Help: click bars to focus the vote list.

Votes
(Sort by , , , , )
Selected: of from including with NOMINATE scores within .