Law Center Search Results

On July 31, 2026, the NAM filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to find that class actions require an identifiable group of plaintiffs with Article III standing in order to proceed. Cline v. Sunoco is a class action arising from disputes over royalty payments made to 53,000 individuals who own royalty interests in three Oklahoma oil wells. Specifically, they claim they are owed 12% interest on all late payments they received from Sunoco because the company waited to make the interest payments until royalty owners requested them in violation of Oklahoma law. A majority of the class, however, could not be identified due to inadequate recordkeeping of royalty ownership across generations. Despite this gaping hole in the plaintiffs’ case, the lower courts certified the class and, following a jury trial, forced Sunoco to pay over $175 million in damages to a mostly unidentifiable group of individuals—a substantial portion of that sum would be routed to an unclaimed property fund. Unfortunately, the 10th Circuit affirmed.

In our amicus brief, we urge the Court to grant cert to resolve a deep circuit split on ascertainability—the commonsense notion that the identity of class members must be ascertainable before a class is certified. Without this requirement, uninjured individuals with no relation to the dispute could claim class membership and defendants may be unfairly forced to compensate people unaffected by the dispute. Courts must rigorously enforce the requirements of Rule 23 to ensure the integrity of our legal system and prevent class counsel from reaping windfall damages awards for people who cannot be identified, will never demonstrate any injury and will never recover any money.