News & Analysis as of

Appeals Class Members

Mintz

District Court Denies Class Cert in TCPA Suit on Ascertainability Grounds

Mintz on

In a win for Defendant IQVIA, Inc., accused of allegedly sending faxes in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied Plaintiff...more

Kilpatrick

Oklahoma federal judge stays class notice but declines to stay summary judgment briefing based on defendant’s Rule 23(f) petition...

Kilpatrick on

A federal judge in Oklahoma recently stayed class proceedings, including the distribution of class notice, but declined to stay summary judgment briefing pending a ruling on the defendant’s petition to the Tenth Circuit for...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

The Class Action Chronicle - August 2023

Post-TransUnion, A Closer Examination of Threshold for Article III Standing- Class action trials are rare. The potential magnitude of an adverse verdict, even when improbable, makes the risks of trial unpalatable for...more

McGuireWoods LLP

First Circuit Deepens Circuit Split On Fairness Of Class Settlements

McGuireWoods LLP on

On December 16, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit made two important findings in a class-action settlement case. First, the Court vacated the district court’s settlement approval finding that the...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

“How to Lose a Class Action Settlement in 10 Ways” – Recent Decisions Reflect a Trend of Applying Greater Scrutiny to Attorneys’...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Last month, the Ninth Circuit struck down a district court’s order approving a class settlement and awarding nearly $7 million in attorneys’ fees to class counsel in a consumer class action challenging the defendant’s...more

Goodwin

Eleventh Circuit Holds Administrative Feasibility is Not a Requirement for Class Certification

Goodwin on

On February 2, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a significant decision holding that a putative class representative does not need to establish an administratively feasible method to...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

The Seventh Circuit Provides District Courts Ammunition To Deal With “Objector Blackmail” In Proposed Class Settlements

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: “Objector blackmail” occurs in the class settlement approval process when a few class members object to a proposed settlement and, after the district court has overruled their objections, pursue appeals...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

The Seventh Circuit Clears a Roadblock to Settlement

Pierce Atwood LLP on

As I have discussed in earlier posts, there are multiple stakeholders to class action settlements, including named plaintiffs, absent class members, class counsel, defendants, and the courts. Conflicts can arise within some...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

9th Circuit Holds All Members of a Certified Class Must Have Article III Standing To Recover Monetary Damages

- In a matter of first impression within the 9th Circuit, the court held that each member of a certified class must have Article III standing in order to recover individual monetary damages at trial. - Those class members...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Appeals Court Says No FLSA Notice for Employees Who Agree to Arbitrate

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On January 24, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit announced a new standard by which a district court should evaluate whether notice of an FLSA collective action should be sent to employees who may be...more

Robinson+Cole Class Actions Insider

Sixth Circuit Reminds District Courts and Defendants That Notice Must Be Given Before Binding Class Members

A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit provides an important reminder that if defendants want absent class members to be bound by a summary judgment ruling in their favor, generally they must...more

Carlton Fields

Life May Not Be Fair, But Arizona Cannot Find Out Without Standing

Carlton Fields on

The Sixth Circuit recently held that Arizona lacked standing to intervene in, and object to, a nationwide class settlement at the settlement fairness hearing. The underlying case involved Tristar Products’ defective pressure...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

It’s None of Your Business: Sixth Circuit Says Arizona Lacks Article III Standing to Intervene to Challenge a Class Settlement

Does a state, whose citizens are among the absent class members in a class action settlement, have Article III standing to challenge the supposed unfairness of the settlement? In Chapman v. Tristar Products, Inc., the Sixth...more

Bennett Jones LLP

What the Law Commission of Ontario’s New Report on Class Actions Could Mean for Litigants

Bennett Jones LLP on

On July 17, 2019, the Law Commission of Ontario released the final report of its class action investigative project, Class Actions: Objectives, Experiences and Reforms. The project is the most comprehensive research,...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Third Circuit Tackles Third-Party Funding Issues in In Re: National Football League Players’ Concussion Injury Litigation

Third-party litigation funding has received increased scrutiny over the past several years, particularly in the context of mass torts, class actions, and multidistrict litigation. Most of this scrutiny has focused on...more

Carlton Fields

Third Circuit Finds Class Members’ Cash Advance Agreements May Fall Short of a True Assignment

Carlton Fields on

On April 26, 2019, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed in part and affirmed in part a district court order purporting to void cash advance agreements entered into by and between class members and litigation funding...more

Polsinelli

Five Points to Know about the December 2018 Amendments to Rule 23

Polsinelli on

On December 1, 2018, the amendments to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule 23”), which governs class actions, went into effect. The amendments codify certain procedures the courts have been requiring or...more

Pierce Atwood LLP

In re Celexa And Lexapro – The First Circuit Weighs In On China Agritech And American Pipe Tolling

Pierce Atwood LLP on

The Supreme Court meant what it said in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh – that is the primary lesson from the First Circuit’s January 30th decision in In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. ...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Class Size Doesn’t Matter—Seventh Circuit Holds That Federal Law Bars Private Securities Class Actions Brought Under State Law...

In Nielen-Thomas v. Concorde Investment Servs., LLC, No. 18-2875, 2019 WL 302766 (7th Cir. Jan. 24, 2019), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act...more

Moore & Van Allen PLLC

What About the Merits – What, If Anything, Will the Supreme Court Do With Cy Pres-Only Class Action Settlements?

Moore & Van Allen PLLC on

We have been talking about Frank v. Gaos, (No. 17-961), since the U.S. Supreme Court decided to tackle the extreme case of the use of the cy pres doctrine in the context of class action cases. The settlement is a cy pres-only...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Are credits coupons? The Ninth Circuit Says Yes in Calculating Total Value of Class Action Settlements

Companies may be inclined to offer “coupons” or similar benefits to settle consumer class actions. While offering coupons is permissible, in In re Easysaver Rewards Litigation, No. 16-56307, 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 28000 (9th...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

American Pipe Clarified: Statute of Limitations for Class Actions not tolled by a Prior Motion for Class Certification

In a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court held on June 11, 2018 that a pending motion for class certification does not toll the statute of limitations for the filing of a new class action lawsuit by a putative...more

Amundsen Davis LLC

Good News For Defendants: Supreme Court Rejects Tolling For Class Actions

Amundsen Davis LLC on

On June 11, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, clarifying the scope of the tolling doctrine triggered by the filing of a class action. The doctrine, as established by earlier Court...more

Mayer Brown Free Writings + Perspectives

Pending Class Action Does Not Toll Statute of Limitations

The U.S. Supreme Court reached a decision in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh holding that the equitable tolling rule does not apply to subsequently filed class action claims. ...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Limiting Class Action Tolling: Supreme Court Rules That Filing A Class Action Does Not Toll The Limitations Period For Successive...

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, the Supreme Court earlier this month held that pending class actions do not toll the limitations period for successive class actions. The ruling limits plaintiffs’ ability to bring successive...more

65 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide