Article III Supreme Court of the United States

News & Analysis as of

Policy Fights in the Courts: United States v. Texas

On April 18, 2016, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in a major immigration suit, United States v. Texas. This case is a highly-politicized lawsuit in which dozens of states have sued the federal government over what is...more

7th Circuit Court of Appeals finds Article III Standing for P.F. Chang’s Plaintiffs

On April 14, 2016, the Court of Appeals for 7th Circuit reinstated plaintiffs’ action against P.F. Chang’s restaurant chain that arose out of the well-reported breach of payment card information. The action was previously...more

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Important Immigration Case, United States v. Texas

On April 18, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in United States v. Texas, the lawsuit challenging President Obama’s executive actions on immigration. The case concerns a program that President Obama announced...more

Supreme Court Reinforces Strict Rule On Citizenship of Unincorporated Entities for Diversity Jurisdiction to the Detriment of...

Article III of the U.S. Constitution extends the jurisdiction of federal courts to “[c]ontroversies … between Citizens of different States.” U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1. “This rule is easy enough to apply to humans, but...more

Third Circuit Follows Gomez on Mootness Issue, But Narrowly

In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of complete relief does not moot a plaintiff's individual claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third...more

The Supreme Court's Vindication of The In re Nexium Dissent

We have commented previously on several aspects of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Tyson Foods. One additional important aspect that deserves special attention in the First Circuit is the issue of how to cull...more

U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Nebraska and Oklahoma’s Lawsuit Challenging Colorado Recreational Marijuana Laws

In December 2014, the States of Nebraska and Oklahoma filed a motion for leave to file a complaint against the State of Colorado with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS). The motion argued, among other things,...more

What Does Americold Realty Trust Have To Do With Rule 147?

Under Article III, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution, the judicial power of the federal courts may extend to, among other things, controversies between citizens of different states. When a party is a trust, in what state is...more

Scalia’s Death Leaves High Court in Limbo on Three Key Consumer Class Actions

While the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia creates an immediate vacancy on the bench, it also likely will leave the high court’s docket in limbo on number of key consumer class actions awaiting the Court’s...more

Supreme Court Sustains TCPA Plaintiff’s Claim Following an Unaccepted Settlement Offer

On January 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, where it was considering whether a plaintiff seeking damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) is able to...more

U.S. Supreme Court Rules That an Unaccepted Settlement Offer or Offer of Judgment Does Not Moot a Plaintiff’s Individual or Class...

Action Item: The U.S. Supreme Court clarifies the split among the circuits and holds that an unaccepted Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 offer and unaccepted settlement offer neither moots an individual or class claim. But...more

Supreme Court Rules that Unaccepted Offer Does Not Moot a Claim But Leaves Door Open to Mooting Through Actual Payment

On January 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a long-awaited ruling in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez. Although their reasoning differed, six of the Justices held that an unaccepted offer of complete relief does not in and of...more

Supreme Court Rules Settlement Offer Does Not Moot Class Action

On January 20th, 2016, in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, a case closely watched by both sides of the class action bar, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in an opinion authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg that an unaccepted Rule...more

Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Decides Whether Claims are Moot in Gomez

The Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's ruling and held that Defendant's unaccepted settlement offer or offer of judgment did not moot Plaintiff's case. Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, — U.S.— (Jan. 20, 2016)....more

"Mass Tort and Consumer Class Action Outlook: Opportunities and Challenges"

In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to hand down several decisions addressing overbroad or “no-injury” class actions, and a number of important issues are percolating in the lower courts as well. Below are some issues...more

Supreme Court affirms government contractors qualified immunity

In a 6-3 decision issued on January 20, the Supreme Court affirmed in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857, that federal government contractors are immune from litigation and liability if their work complies with federal...more

How Not to Moot a Case: Supreme Court Rules Case Remains Live After Unaccepted Offer of Settlement

On January 20, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided another case in a line of cases addressing the issue of class action mootness. Specifically, the justices ruled that an unaccepted settlement offer or offer...more

Supreme Court Holds Unaccepted Offers for Full Relief Do Not Moot Class Actions

Relying on “basic principles of contract law,” the Supreme Court on Wednesday held that an unaccepted settlement offer and offer of judgment under Rule 68 are “legal nullit[ies]” that have no effect on whether a live...more

Unaccepted Settlement Offer Cannot Moot Consumer Lawsuits

On Wednesday, January 20, in a 6-3 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court held that an unaccepted settlement offer, or offer of judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68, cannot moot a plaintiff's case. The ruling...more

Unaccepted Rule 68 Offer Does Not Moot a Plaintiff's Claims, U.S. Supreme Court Rules

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an unaccepted Rule 68 settlement offer does not moot a class action even when the offer would provide the named plaintiff with complete individual relief. The decision in Campbell-Ewald...more

Supreme Court opinion in Campbell-Ewald co. v. Gomez: kicking the can down the road

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, No. 14-857. The question presented was whether an unaccepted offer of full relief on the named plaintiff’s individual claim will render a putative class...more

U.S. Supreme Court Limits Ability of Class Action Defendants to “Pick Off” Named Plaintiffs

In recent years many defendants facing putative class action lawsuits in federal court have sought to neutralize these lawsuits by offering total relief to all named plaintiffs before the district court issues a ruling on...more

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the United States issued decisions in four cases today: Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, No. 14-857: Respondent Jose Gomez received Navy recruitment text messages without his consent. He filed a nationwide...more

Data Breach Class Action Against Michael Stores Doesn’t Stick

The arts and crafts retail chain Michael Stores Inc. (“Michaels”) received a late holiday gift in the form of a dismissal of a data breach class action lawsuit. On December 28, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern...more

Think You Can Moot Plaintiff's Claim With a Rule 68 Offer of Judgment? Think Again

As we have previously noted, federal appellate courts have been split on whether a defendant can moot a class action by making a Rule 68 offer of judgment, agreeing to pay all of the damages to which the named plaintiff seeks...more

152 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×