Dow said that the settlement will resolve the $1.06 billion judgment against Dow entered in 2013.
Advertisement
Stunningly, Dow’s statement singled out two major cases in which Scalia wrote the majority opinions – 2011’s Wal-Mart v. Dukes and 2013’s Comcast v. Behrend – essentially conceding that, without Scalia, the company no longer had any prospects of winning. What inspired this change of heart?
Scalia died earlier this month at a ranch in West Texas, where the justice was “among high-ranking members of an exclusive fraternity for hunters called the International Order of St. Hubertus”, according to The Washington Post.
But alas, big plaintiff won this round.
However, the company said Friday the court’s current lineup has “increased the likelihood for unfavorable outcomes for businesses involved in class action suits”.
They spent nearly a billion because a 4-4 court without Scalia, in other words, would be less company-friendly.
Since Scalia’s death, Republicans in the Senate have vowed to keep the seat vacant until the next president is elected, denying President Obama the chance to chose a nominee. The final judgment in the case was reduced to reflect $139 million in settlements with the other defendants before trial. Any 4-4 decision by the court in the meantime could leave decisions by lower courts-such as the Kansas decision with respect to Dow-intact. It was also known that it could be a serious change for how corporate cases are treated in the review process at the U.S. Supreme Court.
Breyer, speaking at an event to promote his latest book, pointed out that, historically, half of the high court’s decisions are unanimous, and maybe 20 percent turn on a 5-4 vote.
“While Dow is settling this case, it continues to strongly believe that it was not part of any conspiracy and the judgment was fundamentally flawed as a matter of class action law”, a Dow news release states.
Advertisement
-With assistance from Margaret Cronin Fisk, Andrew Harris, Mike Dorning and Jack Kaskey.
