521 U.S. 591 (U.S. Supreme Court 1997)
Amchem Products, Inc. v.
Whether a federal court may certify a settlement-only class action under Rule 23(b)(3) when the proposed class fails to satisfy Rule 23(a)'s adequacy requirement and Rule 23(b)(3)'s predominance requirement, notwithstanding the fact that no trial will occur.
A class action—whether for litigation or settlement—must satisfy all the requirements of Rule 23. For a Rule 23(b)(3) class, the court must find that Rule 23(a)'s prerequisites are met (numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation) and that common questions predominate over individual ones and that a class action is superior to other methods. In the settlement-only context, the manageability factor under Rule 23(b)(3)(D) is not relevant because no trial will occur, but all other Rule 23 requirements apply with full force. Adequacy demands structural assurance of fair and adequate representation for divergent interests; a proposed settlement cannot supply the predominance of common issues, nor can Rule 23(e)'s fairness review substitute for compliance with Rule 23(a) and (b)(3).
The Supreme Court affirmed the Third Circuit's decision decertifying the settlement-only class. The proposed class failed Rule 23(b)(3)'s predominance requirement and Rule 23(a)(4)'s adequacy of representation requirement; the inapplicability of trial manageability did not excuse noncompliance with the other Rule 23 criteria.
Amchem is the canonical case establishing that settlement classes are not exempt from Rule 23's structural safeguards. It requires courts to rigorously police adequacy and predominance even when a proposed settlement appears efficient or desirable. For mass torts, the decision pushed parties toward using subclasses, separate counsel for divergent interests, more tailored class definitions, and careful attention to choice-of-law. Amchem, together with Ortiz v. Fibreboard, reshaped the architecture of aggregate settlements, preventing global deals that sacrifice the rights of exposure-only or future claimants in the name of expediency.