Abstract
In order to maintain a class action in either the state or federal court system, the representative party must fairly and adequately protect the interests of the other class members. It is axiomatic that a representative cannot adequately protect the interests of the class if his interests are antagonistic to or in conflict with those of the class he purports to represent. The Nebraska Supreme Court in considering the issue of adequacy of representation has applied an economic standard to determine when there is a conflict of interest within a class. In Blankenship v. Omaha Public Power District the court held that if any party in the class stands to suffer a long-run economic loss as a result of his inclusion in the class, the representative party will have a conflict of interest with the other class members. This Note examines the court's authority and rationale for imposing this economic standard and discusses the standard's future viability.
Recommended Citation
Bradley D. Holtorf,
Long-Run Economic Loss: Conflicting Interests of Class Members: Blankenship v. Omaha Public Power District, 195 Neb. 170, 237 N.W.2d 86 (1976),
56 Neb. L. Rev. 338
(1977)
Available at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol56/iss2/6