South Carolina
How Amgen Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds applies in South Carolina: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Civil Procedure.
South Carolina generally aligns with the principles established in Amgen regarding the requirements for class certification and the need for reliable statistical evidence in proving predominance and superiority under Rule 23. Courts in South Carolina emphasize a thorough examination of these standards before granting class status.
In South Carolina, Rule 23 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure mirrors federal Rule 23, requiring the party seeking class certification to demonstrate that common questions of law or fact predominate over individual questions.
The court reinforced the necessity of commonality and predominance in class certification, akin to Amgen's emphasis on the same.
Acknowledged the necessity for a rigorous analysis of the requirements for class action under Rule 23.
Clarified that mere allegations of commonality do not suffice; evidentiary support must demonstrate the predominance of common issues.
South Carolina's approach largely mirrors the federal standard established in Amgen, whereby courts critically assess evidence for class certification and require a showing of predominance. While both systems adhere to similar rules, South Carolina courts may emphasize local precedents more resolutely than federal courts.
The principles from Amgen are essential for the South Carolina bar exam, particularly in examination of class action procedures and requirements under Rule 23.