INDIVIDUALS WITHIN THE AGGREGATE - RELATIONSHIPS, REPRESENTATION, ANDFEES

Over the past decades, aggregate litigation has become more common; th rough various statutory, rule-based, and informal means, judges and la wyers consolidate large groups of individual litigants and claims. The paradigm of a class action, however, continues to dominate the litera ture, and with it, the assumption that a single set of lead lawyers re present all of the plaintiffs in the assembled group. This article add resses the problems raised when, in contrast to that paradigm, aggrega tion brings together mass tort plaintiffs, some of whom come with indi vidually-retained plaintiffs' attorneys (IRPAs), who perform tasks in addition to those done by a court-appointed plaintiffs' steering commi ttee (PSC). Our central questions are about the roles of the many lawy ers within the aggregate and the potential for policymakers to use pro cedural tools and the law of attorneys' fees to structure incentives t o enhance the experience of individual litigants within the aggregate. Animating our interest is the view that, in addition to effectuating outcomes, litigation is also a means by which to express political and social relationships. What occurs within an aggregate formed for adju dicatory purposes is of moment for the polity.