Takeaway: We have written about the use of survey-based conjoint analyses to prove class-wide damages. See Ninth Circuit summarily reverses exclusion of conjoint survey with “major flaws” (January 18, 2022). Recently,...more
Takeaway: Federal Rule 23 authorizes representative litigation in the form of class actions that satisfy its various requirements. The policy underlying the rule is efficiency. For example, the numerosity element (Rule...more
Takeaway: There are, essentially, two ways to defeat a RICO class action: through the denial of class certification or by the dismissal of the RICO claims on the merits. We have written a number of articles about both the...more
Takeaway: In the U.S. Supreme Court’s seminal decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 342 (2011), the court described a class consisting of 1.5 million class members as “one of the most expansive” classes...more
Takeaway: From the perspective of attorneys representing class action defendants, it seems that some circuits (especially the Ninth Circuit) do not give much deference to district court decisions denying class certification....more
Kilpatrick Townsend partner Jay Bogan, along with three other panel members, recently presented “Class Certification after Olean v. Bumble Bee: Expert Testimony, Uninjured Class Members, and Article III Standing.” This...more
Takeaway: A year ago we wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Olean Wholesale Grocery Cooperative, Inc. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, 993 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2021), where a panel held that a district court abused its...more
Takeaway: When a district court certifies a damages class action, it often cites the long line of cases holding that, because damages for each class member can be determined after a class action trial on liability,...more
Takeaway: The individual claims asserted by a class representative – as well as the defenses that apply to those claims – form the foundation of any effort to certify a class under Rule 23. If the claims of the class...more
Takeaway: When litigating class certification and motions to compel arbitration, defense attorneys virtually always prefer federal over state courts. In two cases involving home security provider ADT, L.L.C. (ADT), and a...more
Takeaway: Consumer class actions primarily target a damages remedy. In the antitrust context, state antitrust law provides the path to damages for indirect purchasers, because federal antitrust law bars indirect purchaser...more
Takeaway: Federal Rule 23(c)(4) provides: “When appropriate, an action may be brought or maintained as a class action with respect to particular issues.” Although class plaintiffs often seek “issue certification” as an...more
Takeway: Class action litigation implicates jurisdictional issues in a number of ways. Class action defendants generally prefer federal over state courts and – when presented with the opportunity – will seek to remove...more
Takeaway: Judge Timothy Corrigan of the Middle District of Florida recently found a way to certify a class action where consumers alleged the theft of payment card data, acknowledging he “may be the first to certify a Rule...more
Takeaway: We have posted a number of articles about whether Rule 23’s predominance requirement can be satisfied when a proposed class includes uninjured class members. See, e.g., D.C. Circuit denies class certification...more
Takeaway: Class actions brought under federal RICO present significant risks for defendants. They present the opportunity for certification of a nationwide class under a federal statute, and the remedies provided under...more
Takeaway: In a prior post, we reported on a Central District of California decision granting an early motion to strike class allegations. Don’t miss the chance to strike out class actions (Feb. 27, 2019). But on appeal,...more
Takeaway: The Circuits have split on the issue of whether a class representative must show the class is “ascertainable.” The Third Circuit has required a Rule 23(b)(3) class to be “currently and readily ascertainable.” ...more
Takeaway: Federal appellate courts review a district court’s rulings on motions for class certification and to exclude expert testimony for an abuse of discretion. The Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Grodzitsky v....more
Takeaway: Class action litigation tends to be complicated, especially for trial courts resolving motions for class certification. These motions usually require courts to pour through dense briefing and evidentiary...more
The issue of personal jurisdiction in class action litigation continues to be addressed by the federal appellate courts. We recently published an article about the Seventh Circuit’s decision in Mussat v. IQVIA, No. 19-1204,...more
Takeaway: In a prior post, we reported on the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Sali v. Corona Regional Medical Center, 889 F.3d 623 (9th Cir. 2018) that class certification evidence need not be admissible (Ninth Circuit deepens...more
In a prior post [First Circuit addresses an issue that continues to vex (and split) the circuits: should a class be certified that includes uninjured class members? (October 24, 2018)], we reported on a First Circuit...more
Takeaway: The ascertainability requirement for class actions has divided both California and federal appellate courts. In Noel v. Thrifty Payless, Inc., --- P.3d ----, No. S246490, 2019 WL 3403895 (CA July 29, 2019), the...more
Takeaway: A federal court should not lose jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) when it denies a motion for class certification. In a prior post – Getting it wrong – remanding a removed class action back...more