Brief Fact Summary. The class of plaintiffs in a class action suit provided notice to class members that they could opt-out of the suit via first class mail.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. A forum state may exercise jurisdiction over the claims of an absent class action plaintiff, even though that plaintiff may not possess the minimum contacts with the forum which would support personal jurisdiction over a defendant.
Moreover, Shutts expressly limited its holding to those class actions which seek to bind known plaintiffs concerning claims wholly or predominately for money judgments.
View Full Point of LawIssue. Whether a forum state may exercise jurisdiction over the claims of an absent class action plaintiff, even though that plaintiff may not possess the minimum contacts with the forum which would support personal jurisdiction over a defendant.
Held. Yes. The judgment of the Supreme Court of Kansas was affirmed. The burdens placed by a state upon an absent class action plaintiff are not the same order or magnitude as those it places upon an absent defendant. Unlike a defendant in a civil suit, a class-action plaintiff is not required to fend for himself. A forum state may exercise jurisdiction over the claims of an absent class action plaintiff, even though that plaintiff may not possess the minimum contacts with the forum, which would support personal jurisdiction over a defendant. The interests of the absent plaintiffs are sufficiently protected by the forum state when those plaintiffs are provided with a request for exclusion that can be returned within a reasonable time to the court.
Discussion. Essentially, the court is saying that because absent plaintiffs in a class action suit do not have to actually show up in court and defend a complaint that could result in liability, an absent plaintiff is not entitled to the same due process a defendant receives because the risk of harm to the absent plaintiff is slight.