Seroxat (Paxil) national class action youth suicide - motion denied

http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/opinions/07D0122P.pdf

A class action is not an appropriate vehicle for litigating the issues in this case. The
plaintiffs fail tomeet the typicality and adequacy prongs of Rule 23(a). Typicality is wanting
because the individual circumstances of the named plaintiffs are markedly different from
those of the putative class members and GSK can raise unique defenses to almost each
class member's claim. These same differences result in interests so divergent that the
named plaintiffs are inadequate representatives of the absent classmembers. Finally, the
predominance and superiority requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) are lacking - predominance
because the proposed common issues are overwhelmed by the differences among the
factual and legal issues affecting individual causation, damages and defenses; and,superiority because the proposed class would be unmanageable in light of the choice-oflaw
conflicts that are resolved in favor of each individual's home state. In essence, the
plaintiffs have failed to define a class capable of ascertaining membership without
individualized fact-finding. Therefore, the motion for certification will be denied