class-action-complaint
Drafts federal or state class action complaints satisfying FRCP Rule 23 certification prerequisites. Use when filing class actions, representative plaintiff complaints, Rule 23 certification pleadings, or multi-party consumer/securities/antitrust actions.
Best use case
class-action-complaint is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Drafts federal or state class action complaints satisfying FRCP Rule 23 certification prerequisites. Use when filing class actions, representative plaintiff complaints, Rule 23 certification pleadings, or multi-party consumer/securities/antitrust actions.
Teams using class-action-complaint should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/class-action-complaint/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How class-action-complaint Compares
| Feature / Agent | class-action-complaint | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Drafts federal or state class action complaints satisfying FRCP Rule 23 certification prerequisites. Use when filing class actions, representative plaintiff complaints, Rule 23 certification pleadings, or multi-party consumer/securities/antitrust actions.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Class Action Complaint Drafts a court-ready class action complaint that survives a 12(b)(6) motion and lays the groundwork for Rule 23 certification. ## Prerequisites Collect before drafting: 1. **Named plaintiff facts** — individual harm, standing, timeline, no conflicts with putative class 2. **Defendant identification** — corporate structure, registered agents, principal place of business 3. **Class-wide conduct** — documents/policies/data showing systematic wrongdoing 4. **Proposed class definition** — objective inclusion/exclusion criteria 5. **Jurisdictional basis** — federal question (§ 1331), CAFA (§ 1332(d)), or state court 6. **Case files** — contracts, correspondence, expert reports, damages data ## Complaint Structure **Caption**: Court name/division; "[Named Plaintiff], on behalf of [himself/herself/themselves] and all others similarly situated"; defendant(s); "CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT"; jury demand if applicable. | # | Section | Content | |---|---------|---------| | I | Introduction | 2–3 ¶¶: parties, wrongdoing summary, class-wide harm | | II | Parties | Named plaintiff standing + defendant corporate details | | III | Jurisdiction & Venue | Statutory basis, amount in controversy, CAFA threshold ($5M+, 100+ members, minimal diversity) | | IV | Factual Allegations | Chronological narrative with dates, amounts, document quotes | | V | Class Allegations | Rule 23(a) + 23(b) elements per checklist below | | VI | Causes of Action | Each count as separate section | | VII | Prayer for Relief | Itemized demands | ## Rule 23 Checklist Draft each element as a subsection with factual support. ### 23(a) — All four required - **Numerosity** — Joinder impracticable. Allege estimated size with evidentiary basis. Generally 40+ suffices. - **Commonality** — Common questions of law/fact driven by defendant's uniform conduct. Per *Wal-Mart v. Dukes*, 564 U.S. 338 (2011): common contention whose resolution drives each member's claim. - **Typicality** — Named plaintiff's claims arise from same conduct/theories as class. Flag unique defenses. - **Adequacy** — No conflicts with class; qualified class counsel with relevant experience. ### 23(b) — At least one required - **(b)(1)** — Separate actions risk incompatible standards or impair other members' interests. - **(b)(2)** — Defendant acted on grounds generally applicable to class; injunctive/declaratory relief appropriate. - **(b)(3) Predominance** — Common questions predominate. Address individual issues (reliance, damages variation) and explain why they don't defeat predominance. - **(b)(3) Superiority** — Class action superior to alternatives. Address: member control interest, existing litigation, forum desirability, manageability. ## Class Definition Template > All [persons/entities] in [geographic scope] who [purchased/used/were subjected to] [product/service/practice] [from/by] [Defendant] during the period [start date] through [end date/present] [excluding Defendant's officers, directors, employees, and their immediate families; judicial officers assigned to this case; and persons who timely opt out]. Definition must use objective, administratively feasible criteria — neither overbroad nor unduly restrictive — identifiable from defendant's records or objective evidence. ## Causes of Action Per count: (1) incorporate prior ¶¶ by reference, (2) statutory/common law basis with citation, (3) defendant's violating conduct, (4) element-by-element allegations, (5) class-wide harm and causation, (6) damages type (actual, statutory, treble, punitive). | Category | Typical Theories | |----------|-----------------| | Consumer | State UDAP, TILA, FCRA, TCPA | | Securities | Securities Act §§ 11, 12; Exchange Act § 10(b)/Rule 10b-5; PSLRA | | Antitrust | Sherman Act §§ 1–2; Clayton Act § 4 | | Employment | FLSA § 216(b), Title VII, state wage/hour | | Common law | Breach of contract, fraud, negligence, unjust enrichment | ## Prayer for Relief Include: (1) class certification + named plaintiff as representative, (2) appointment of class counsel, (3) declaratory relief, (4) injunctive relief, (5) compensatory damages, (6) statutory/treble/punitive damages with statutory basis, (7) restitution/disgorgement, (8) pre- and post-judgment interest, (9) attorneys' fees and costs with fee-shifting cite, (10) catch-all "such other relief as the Court deems just." ## Pitfalls and Checks - Use **numbered paragraphs** throughout the complaint body. - Use "upon information and belief" only with stated factual basis for allegations outside plaintiff's personal knowledge. - Cite documents, dates, dollar amounts — never bare legal conclusions. - **Securities fraud**: Meet PSLRA heightened pleading — allege each misleading statement with particularity and strong inference of scienter. - **Fraud claims**: Meet Rule 9(b) — who, what, when, where, how. - **Ascertainability**: In Third Circuit and similar courts, allege class members identifiable through objective criteria and feasible mechanism. - **Standing**: Named plaintiff must have Article III standing for each claim and each form of relief. - Conform to filing court's local rules (margins, font, spacing, page limits, ECF). - Never allege certification is "certain" — allege supporting facts and request certification in the prayer.