Supreme Court Closes CAFA Loophole in Standard Fire v. Knowles
The Southern District of California denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand a putative class action removed pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), where the plaintiff had alleged that the primary defendant’s product,...more
In a decision that may make it somewhat easier for defendants to remove putative class actions from state to federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that defendants in such cases do not need to offer evidence in their...more
The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more
Just two weeks after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a CAFA-based remand order where the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the...more
Days before the Supreme Court’s decision addressing the requirements for CAFA notices of removal in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Third Circuit addressed the evidentiary requirements for surviving a...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiff’s motion to remand, holding that plaintiff’s claim for unpaid wages and overtime satisfied CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement. ...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that a notice of removal from state court to federal court requires only pleading good faith allegations that the amount in controversy exceeds a jurisdictional threshold. The...more
In a previous blog, we explained that the Supreme Court was considering whether a defendant merely has to allege jurisdictional facts or provide evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case....more
The US Supreme Court ruled last Monday that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their attempts to remove a case from state to federal court. Rather, they need only include in their...more
On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens that a class action defendant need only allege the requisite amount of controversy “plausibly” in the notice of...more
On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split in holding that a defendant need not supply evidence of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act...more
The Supreme Court has held that a notice of removal requires only a “plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold,” and confirmed that a notice of removal need not include evidence...more
The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) has found its way to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court several times in the last two years, as plaintiffs and defendants seek to define the parameters of the federal law...more
Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719, a case involving the procedural requirements for removing a class action from state to federal court under the Class...more
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument this week in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719. This case involves whether a defendant must provide evidence with its notice of removal under the Class Action...more
In a boon to defendants seeking to remove cases to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), the Ninth Circuit has overturned a rule requiring defendants to show to a “legal certainty” that the...more
In Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a class-action plaintiff may not avoid the effect of the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) by “stipulating” he will not seek damages in excess of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, resolved the debate between the plaintiffs’ bar and defense bar regarding whether a class representative’s stipulation that damages would not exceed $5...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles confirms that a plaintiff cannot avoid federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) by stipulating that the class will seek less...more
The U.S. Supreme Court resoundingly signaled an end to a form of statutory manipulation in the class action arena Tuesday. A unanimous court held that named plaintiffs in class actions may not defeat federal removal...more
The U.S. Supreme Court holds in a 9–0 decision that class action plaintiffs cannot promise to limit damages in an effort to remain below the Class Action Fairness Act's $5 million federal jurisdictional threshold....more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its first decision reviewing the scope of removal jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In Knowles v. Standard Fire Insurance Co., No. 11-1450 (U.S.), the...more
In a unanimous decision issued on March 19, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the named plaintiff in a proposed class action lawsuit cannot defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA or the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, 568 U.S. __, No. 11-1450, 2013 WL 1104735 (Mar. 19, 2013), that plaintiffs attempting to bring a class action lawsuit cannot escape federal...more
On March 19, 2013, the United States Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles barring class action plaintiffs from using stipulations that limit the amount in controversy to avoid...more