Mootness

News & Analysis as of

Court Lets Plaintiff Revive Mooted Claims In Second Action Against Same Defendants

The Eastern District of New York recently denied a motion to dismiss and found that the plaintiff’s claims were not precluded by a different court’s ruling that the same claims against the same defendants had been mooted by...more

Motion for Discovery Denied as Moot

GEA Process Engineering, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc., (IPR2014-00041) Paper 38, (IPR2014-00043), Paper 37, (IPR2014-00051), Paper 36. (IPR2014-00054), Paper 35, (IPR2014-00055), Paper 29 (June 3, 2014), the Board denied...more

Bankruptcy Beat: Luck of the Irish Cannot Save Debtor’s Bankruptcy Appeal of Order Granting Relief from the Stay

The importance of obtaining a stay pending appeal of a bankruptcy court order lifting the automatic stay was recently illustrated in Dunne v. Ulster Bank (In re Dunne), 13 cv 00996-JBA (Mar. 11, 2014). In the Dunne case,...more

Appeal Not Moot, Though Disputed Policy Had Been Revised

In a decision issued on February 4, 2014, the Seventh Circuit examined the mootness doctrine in an appeal of the denial of a preliminary injunction that challenged a facility use policy for a war memorial. Smith v. Exec. Dir....more

Equitable Mootness: Two Recent Third Circuit Decisions

Equitable mootness is a judge-made remedy that is misnamed. Judges apply it to seek an equitable result, but mootness in the constitutional sense is absent. Article III, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution bars federal...more

Rule 68 Offer That Excludes Individual Claim Does Not Moot Putative FLSA Collective Action

The recent decision in Silva v. Tegrity Personnel Svcs., Inc., Case No. 4:13-cv-00860 (S.D. Tex. 12/5/2013), suggests that some district courts haven’t fully embraced the Supreme Court’s holding in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v....more

It's Official - Offering Full Monetary Relief Without A Judgment Will Not Moot FLSA Case

Last year we reported on the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Zinni v. ER Solutions, Inc. (11th Cir., August 27, 2012), which seemed to signal that a defendant in a Fair Labor Standards Act case cannot moot the case by...more

Court Of Appeals Holds Claims Against The U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service For Failure To Comply With The Endangered Species Act Are...

On August 20, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia held (pdf) that appellants’ claims against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an alleged failure to take certain actions under the...more

Can "Mooting" a Class or Collective Action Be a Sound Defense Strategy?

Procedural rules that govern lawsuits in federal court permit defendants to make an “offer of judgment,” which is a mechanism allowing a defendant to offer to settle a lawsuit....more

Pick Off the Plaintiff? Rule 68 Offers of Judgment Gain Significant Importance Following New Supreme Court Decision

Last month, the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) provided an unexpected gift to entities facing collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by holding that defendants may moot such a case by making...more

Federal Rule 68 and FLSA Collective Actions

In Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, 133 S. Ct. 1523 (2013), the Supreme Court of the United States last month ruled that an offer of judgment, which the parties agreed was sufficiently generous to satisfy the sole...more

Man-to-Man Defense Clears Court: Early Judgment Offers Will Satisfy Named Plaintiff's Claims…For Now

In its recent decision in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, the U.S. Supreme Court aided employer efforts to "pick off" named plaintiffs in collective actions for unpaid wages brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act...more

California Employment Law Notes - May 2013

Kenneth Hatai sued his employer (CalTrans) and his supervisor (Sameer Haddadeen), alleging discrimination based on his Japanese ancestry and the fact that he was not of Arab ancestry like Haddadeen. The case was tried to a...more

“Picking Off” Plaintiffs in FLSA Collective Actions: Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk

Earlier this month in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, 133 S. Ct. 1523 (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that it is permissible for defendants to “pick off” plaintiffs in FLSA collective actions. In jurisdictions that...more

Recent Supreme Court Decision Highlights Some Pitfalls of Federal Appellate Procedure

Rarely do dissenting Justices advise practitioners to ignore a majority opinion. But, because the five-Justice majority in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, No. 11- 1059, 569 U.S. __ (2013), assumed without deciding an...more

Employers May Be Able to “Pick Off” Named Plaintiffs in FLSA Collective Actions

In its April decision in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, the U.S. Supreme Court buttressed employers’ efforts to “pick off” named plaintiffs in collective actions for unpaid wages brought under the Fair Labor Standards...more

Supreme Court Holds that Early Offer of Judgment Moots Nascent FLSA Collective Action

On April 16, 2013 the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Third Circuit’s decision in Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk and held that a Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) collective action became moot once the employer’s made a...more

Norwich Order against OPP in car accident case upheld on appeal

On March 11, 2013, the Ontario Court of Appeal released its decision in Muller v. Bluewater Recycling. The decision under appeal had been successfully argued by Alfonso Campos Reales, personal injury lawyer from Lerners. The...more

United States Supreme Court Confirms that a Timely and Properly Worded Offer of Judgment May Moot a Collective Action

Last week, the United States Supreme Court confirmed what we informed readers of in our Employment Class Action Blog on February 21, 2011, "A timely and properly worded offer of judgment may moot a collective action and...more

Supreme Court Holds That "Mere Presence" Of FLSA Collective-Action Claims Cannot Save A Lawsuit Where Named Plaintiff's Individual...

Some good news for employers. In a recent 5-4 opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court held that collective-action claims brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) are moot when the named plaintiff has no continuing personal...more

Genesis Healthcare v. Symczyk: Nearly as Many Questions as Answers

When the petition for certiorari in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk was granted, it appeared that the Supreme Court was poised to resolve a clear split in the Circuits about the permissibility of “pick off” moves, at...more

The Supreme Court Holds That Employers Mooting Named Plaintiff's Claim Also Moot FLSA Collective Action

On April 16, 2012, in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, No. 11-1059, the Supreme Court held that when a FLSA plaintiff's claim becomes moot prior to a conditional certification of a collective action, the entire action...more

Supreme Court Rules That Offer of Judgment to Named Plaintiff Could Moot FLSA Collective Actions

In its April 16, 2013 ruling in Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symcyzk, No. 11-1059, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that once the claim of a named plaintiff in a Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") collective action has been...more

Supreme Court Provides Employers An Additional Tool To Limit FLSA Collective Action Allegations

On April 16, 2013, in a 5-4 decision, the United States Supreme Court held that a Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") collective action may not proceed when the lone named plaintiff's individual claim becomes moot. This case...more

U.S. Supreme Court Endorses Employer Efforts to "Pick Off" Named Plaintiff in FLSA Collective Action, but Declines to Resolve...

On April 16, 2013, the United States Supreme Court in Genesis HealthCare Corp. v. Symczyk, 569 U.S. ___ (2013) (No. 11-1059), held that a trial court properly dismissed as moot a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime...more

58 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3