So, here goes.
Ahem. (Is that how one clears one’s throat in writing?)
Volume 82, Number 6 — the June 2008 issue of the Tulane Law Review — is devoted to “The Problem of Multidistrict Litigation.” The table of contents lists the following articles:
“The MDL Model for Resolving Complex Litigation If a Class Action Is Not Possible,” by Edward F. Sherman;
“A View From The Panel: Part of the Solution,” by John G. Heyburn II;
“Cure-All For An Era of Dispersed Litigation? Toward a Maximalist Use of the Multidistrict Litigation Panel’s Transfer Power,” by Richard L. Marcus;
“An Uncommon Focus on ‘Common Questions’: Two Problems with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s Treatment of the ‘One or More Common Questions of Fact’ Requirement for Centralization,” by Mark Herrmann and Pearson Bownas;
“Bellwether Trials in Multidistrict Litigation,” by Eldon Fallon, Jeremy Grabill, and Robert Pitard Wynne;
“Recovering the Social Value of Jurisdictional Redundancy,” by Alexandra D. Lahav; and
“Disaster-Specific Mechanisms for Consolidation,” by Robin J. Effron.
This volume looks like an important contribution to the MDL literature.