This is the sixth edition of The Class Action Chronicle, a quarterly publication that provides an analysis of recent class action trends, along with a summary of class certification and Class Action Fairness Act rulings issued during each quarter. Our publication is designed to keep both practitioners and clients up to date on class action developments in antitrust, mass torts/products liability, consumer fraud and other areas of law. The Winter 2014 edition focuses on rulings issued between August 16, 2014, and November 15, 2014, and begins with a short article regarding recent challenges to class action settlements.

In This Issue:

- Courts May Be Taking A Closer Looks At Class Settlements

-CLASS CERTIFICATION DECISIONS:

- Decisions Granting Motions to Strike/ Dismiss Class Claims

- Decisions Denying Motions to Strike/ Dismiss Class Claims

- Decisions Rejecting/Denying Class Certification

- Decisions Permitting/Granting ClassCertification

- Other Class Action Decisions

-CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT (CAFA)DECISIONS:

- Decisions Denying Motions to Remand/Reversing Remand Orders/

- Finding CAFA Jurisdiction

- Decisions Granting Motions to Remand/Finding No CAFA Jurisdiction

- Other CAFA Decisions

- Excerpt from Courts May Be Taking A Closer Looks At Class Settlements:

A recurring problem in the settlement of class actions is the payment of attorneys’ fees to class counsel that are significantly out of proportion to the compensation actually claimed by real members of the class. In one common settlement scenario, the defendant is required to pay a set amount into a fund, from which claims would be paid to class members who submit a claim. The class counsel then might claim entitlement to some percentage of the entire fund — regardless of the claims rate by class members, which is often quite low. The result is sometimes a fee that exceeds the value of the entire recovery actually paid to class members, forcing class counsel, the court, and even the defendant (because it wants the litigation over and done with) to defend the fee despite the discrepancy. Although courts for a long time have largely gone along with such settlements — even facilitating them by approving settlement agreements that define fees before a single claim is made — recent decisions suggest that this permissive attitude may be shifting...