Takeaway: Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013), the ability of a class action plaintiff to win class certification can often rise or fall with the plaintiff’s ability...more
Takeaway: As we have written on a number of occasions, many courts instinctively have a negative view of motions to strike class allegations. Still, a motion to strike can be a viable strategy for a class defendant faced with...more
Kilpatrick Townsend’s class action defense specialists Nancy Stagg and Joe Reynolds recently presented a webinar addressing “Conjoint Surveys in Class Actions: What You Don’t Know CAN Hurt You.” They discussed how plaintiffs...more
Takeaway: In a false advertising case, one of the key issues for certifying a class is establishing that all putative class members were exposed to the same representations. Where there are no uniform channels through which...more
Takeaway: We previously reported on a string of cases by the Southern District of New York and Northern District of California dismissing deceptive labeling class actions based on the marketing of “diet” soda. See July 9,...more
Takeaway: Defendants confronted with deceptive labeling class actions often face an uphill battle in convincing courts, at the threshold motion to dismiss stage, that a reasonable consumer would not be deceived by a product...more
In Jackson v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 880 F.3d 165 (4th Cir. Jan. 22, 2018), the Fourth Circuit held a counter-defendant cannot invoke federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”). The Court...more
Takeaway: In Collins v. Village of Palatine, Ill., — F.3d —, 2017 WL 5490819, at *1 (7th Cir. November 16, 2017), the Seventh Circuit announced a “simple and uniform” rule for determining when a once-tolled statute of...more
Takeaway: Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), federal courts have grappled with the threshold standing question of what constitutes concrete injury in consumer class...more
Takeaway: In California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., No. 16-373, 2017 WL 2722415 (U.S. June 26, 2017), the Supreme Court issued its closely-watched decision regarding whether the filing of a...more
7/7/2017
/ American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah ,
CalPERS v ANZ Securities ,
Class Action ,
Equitable Tolling ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 11 ,
Section 13 ,
Securities Act of 1933 ,
Securities Litigation ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Statute of Repose
Takeaway: In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), federal courts and litigants have grappled not only with what constitutes an actionable injury sufficient to confer...more
A potent weapon for defending against class actions is the requirement that class members be “ascertainable.” Circuit courts phrase this requirement differently, but at bottom, it is two-fold: (1) the class must be...more