On November 6, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp., Docket No. 12-1036. This case comes out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and involves the removability to Federal court of state Attorney General lawsuits brought on behalf of state residents under the minimal diversity requirements of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2001, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d), (“CAFA”). Representative lawsuits brought by state Attorney Generals are known as parens patrie actions

AU Optronics is one of multiple recent cases heard in Federal District and Appeals courts around the country.  State Attorneys General have brought state court claims under state consumer protection laws against large company-defendants.  Defendants have responded by attempting to remove the lawsuits to Federal court under CAFA, arguing that CAFA’s minimal diversity jurisdiction is created by the State residents on behalf of whom the Attorney Generals act.  As we have previously reported, there is a split as to whether parens patrie actions constitutes “class actions” under CAFA.

Thus far, courts have not found compelling the defendants’ argument that parens patrie actions are removal as “class actions” under CAFA. The highest court may soon provide a definitive answer and greater jurisdictional certainty for these actions, and we will report upon SCOTUS’s decision once it is announced.