The Dangers of Watering Down Class-Certification Standards in Fraud Cases
Class actions have long been difficult to certify in fraud cases. But a recent district court decision in California takes a new approach that would make class certification in fraud cases the norm. That decision is now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit, where Robinson Bradshaw filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Chamber […]
A Roadmap for Addressing Objections to Class Settlement
Earlier this year, the Fourth Circuit published an updated roadmap for addressing objections to class settlement. The decision, 1988 Trust for Allen Children Dated 8/8/88 v. Banner Life Insurance Co., 28 F.4th 513 (4th Cir. 2022), will be an important resource for parties hoping to bypass objections en route to settlement. It will also be […]
Continuing to Troll the Ninth Circuit Class Certification Waters – Will the Supreme Court Join In?
Updated 8-16-22: StarKist and the other defendants filed their petition for certiorari in the Olean Wholesale Grocery case. A link to the Petition is here. 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 […]
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 […]