Stay in the Know
The Sixth Circuit appears poised to become the fourth federal court of appeals to reject the use of the “juridical link” doctrine as a means to establish Article III standing…
Rule 23 does not explicitly require that a court be able to determine who the members are before certifying a class. But judges have found implicit in the Rule a…
If you’re an Uber rider, you’re probably familiar with Uber’s requests that you rate your driver. It’s a five-star rating system. Five is the best. One is the worst. As it turns out, those ratings are vitally important to Uber drivers. Uber requires its drivers to maintain a minimum star…
Last September, we wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Olean Wholesale Grocery v. Bumble Bee Foods and the court’s decision to rehear the case en banc. The en banc Ninth Circuit has now waded back into the class certification waters, with mixed results for defendants. While the en banc…
Last month, the United States House of Representatives passed the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, or the “FAIR Act.” The FAIR Act, should it be passed by the Senate and signed into law, would prohibit class action waivers and mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements in a wide range of disputes: Employment…
As class action litigation under ERISA continues its upward trend across the country, could Article III standing serve as a means through which a Court can fairly assess claims before costly discovery is imposed on defendants and judicial resources are expended? Several recent federal court decisions suggest as much. ERISA,…
A leading feature of the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes is the “rigorous scrutiny” the trial court must apply to determine whether the evidence plaintiffs offer to support class certification meets the requirements of Rule 23. Following the Supreme Court’s decisions in Wal-Mart and Comcast, “[i]t…
In order to have a class certified, the plaintiffs have the burden of proving to the satisfaction of the court, “after a rigorous analysis,” that they comply with Rule 23—that is, that “there are in fact sufficiently numerous parties, common questions of law or fact, etc.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v.…
