In the case of American Pipe & Construction Co. et al. v. Utah et al., 1973, the Supreme Court ruled that the commencement of a class action lawsuit suspends the applicable statute of limitations for all asserted members of the class who would have been parties had the suit been permitted to continue as a class action. The State of Utah filed an antitrust claim against American Pipe and other companies on behalf of itself and other local government entities in its state court system, but it was removed to federal court where it was consolidated with similar cases from different states into one multi-district litigation proceeding. When their motion for certification as a class failed due to lack of manageability, individual municipalities sought to intervene in this ongoing litigation after expiration date set by limitation statutes passed because they were potential members in original filing by Utah which could be seen as "commencement" for them too according to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 23(b). This decision has significant implications regarding timing strategies used during complex litigations involving large number participants.

In the dissenting opinion for American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, Justice Powell argued that the majority's ruling effectively rewrote a portion of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and overstepped its judicial authority by creating an exception not intended by Congress or the drafters of those rules. He contended that this decision could lead to potential abuse as it might encourage plaintiffs to file class actions merely as a strategy to extend statutes of limitations for individual claims, which would undermine both efficiency and fairness in litigation processes. Furthermore, he expressed concern about how this ruling may impact defendants who could face prolonged uncertainty regarding their potential liability due to delayed individual lawsuits following failed class actions.