IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v38y2022i3p613-631..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Auctioning Class Action Representation
[Contingent Fees and Class Actions]

Author

Listed:
  • Alon Klement
  • Zvika Neeman
  • Moran Ofir

Abstract

Class actions feature severe agency problems, resulting from the divergence of interests between class members and the class attorney. This article proposes a novel mechanism for selecting the class attorney and aligning her interests with those of the represented class. The mechanism applies a combined percentage and hourly litigation fee structure, suggested by Polinsky, Mitchell A., and Daniel L. Rubinfeld. 2003. “Aligning the Interests of Lawyers and Clients,” 5 Am Law Econ Rev 165, in which lawyers earn a percentage of the class’ common fund, and bear the same percentage over their time investment. To maximize the expected payoff for the class, we supplement this fee structure with a preliminary two stages auction, in which the role of the lawyer is tendered using competitive bidding. We prove that the proposed auction approximates the highest possible net payoff for the class as the number of lawyers who compete for the right to represent the class increases. The percentage taken by the lawyer would be the lowest possible, and the winning lawyer would be the one who produces the highest expected net payoff for the class. We then extend the model to cases where the attorney files the class action is compensated for her pre-filing investment, and to settlements (JEL K41, K22)

Suggested Citation

  • Alon Klement & Zvika Neeman & Moran Ofir, 2022. "Auctioning Class Action Representation [Contingent Fees and Class Actions]," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(3), pages 613-631.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:38:y:2022:i:3:p:613-631.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewab014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • K22 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Business and Securities Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:38:y:2022:i:3:p:613-631.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.