Robinson Bradshaw

Topic: Appeal

Continuing to Troll the Ninth Circuit Class Certification Waters – Will the Supreme Court Join In?

In September 2021 and again in June of this year, we wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Olean Wholesale Grocery v. Bumble Bee Foods and the court’s opinion following rehearing en banc. The defendants in Olean obtained a extension to file a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court through August 8, 2022, so the […]

Fishy Results for Class Action Defendants in the Ninth Circuit

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 court tossed back the panel’s […]

Does Tyson’s “No Reasonable Juror” Standard Relieve Courts of the Obligation Rigorously To Analyze Expert Statistical Models at Class Certification?

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. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 350-51 […]

How Many Uninjured Class Members is Too Many for Certification? The Waters Remain Murky.

The extent to which the presence of uninjured class members may defeat class certification remains unsettled. While, standing alone, the existence of some uninjured class members may not be not fatal (depending on the circuit), just how many is too many to satisfy the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3) is still in flux. The Ninth […]

When can class members recover for non-traditional harms?

At oral argument in TransUnion, LLC v. Ramirez, TransUnion’s counsel told the U.S. Supreme Court that a lack of harm is a reason “to break out the champagne, not to break out a lawsuit.” The Court has now decided TransUnion, and its decision may make it harder for class-action plaintiffs to sue for non-traditional harms. […]

Does GS § 7A-27 Require Immediate Appeal of all Class Certification Orders?

It appears that the answer may be yes. In 2017, the General Assembly amended G.S. § 7A-27 to permit defendants to take interlocutory appeals from orders granting class certification. Prior to the amendment, plaintiffs could pursue interlocutory appeals from orders denying class certification, but defendants had no reciprocal right of appeal. As amended, section 7A-27(a) […]

5 of 7 NC Justices’ Family Members are in the Class: Will they hear the appeal?

There are 7 justices on the North Carolina Supreme Court, and 4 are required to constitute a quorum. But what if 5 of the 7 justices have a family history of public service that could prevent them from hearing an appeal? In Lake v. State Health Plan for Teachers & State Employees, 852 S.E.2d 888 […]

No Laughing Matter – Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f)’s Deadline for Filing Petitions for Permission to Appeal Certification Orders Cannot Be Equitably Tolled

After a lively oral argument interrupted eight times by laughter, a unanimous Supreme Court reached a serious holding in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, No. 17-1094 (Feb. 26, 2019): that Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f)’s 14-day period for requesting permission to appeal class certification orders cannot be equitably tolled. The class-action plaintiff in Lambert sued for […]

Sixth Circuit Weighs In On Issue Certification

We’ve commented before in this space about the ongoing debate concerning the relationship between the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3) and “issue certification” under Rule 23(c)(4). Yesterday, the Sixth Circuit weighed in on the subject. See Martin v. Behr Dayton Thermal Prods., No. 17-3663 (6th Cir. July 16, 2018). The case related to a “Superfund […]

China Agritech and Tolling in CAFA Cases

Updated 6-11-18: The Supreme Court’s decision earlier today in China Agritech confirms the validity of the observations in the original blog post below.  The Court held that American Pipe tolling does not apply to successive class actions. In American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (1974), and Crown Cork & Seal v. […]