Even though class action lawsuits promote effectiveness, they are usually extremely complex and call for more judicial oversight than other types of litigation. An intrinsic part of class action litigation is the potential for conflicting interests to exist among the absent class members, class counsel, and class representatives. According to Plummer v. Chemical Bank, “the interest of lawyer and class may diverge, as may the interests of different members of the class.” Thus, both the named class representatives and the class counsel hold responsibilities to the absent class members. It is obligatory for the named class representatives and their attorneys to protect the interests of the class members that are absent.
Ultimately, class action litigation must defend individual rights and interests. According to Horton v. Goose Creek Independent School District, “the adequacy requirement mandates an inquiry into the zeal and competence of the representative’s counsel and the ability of the representative to take an active role in and control the litigation and to protect the interests of the absentees…” Hence, it is crucial for the named plaintiffs and their counsel to efficiently credit the interests of the absent class members. If an absent class member is inadequately represented by the named plaintiffs, they will not be bound to a judgment.