News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Establishes New Standards: Removal Pleadings Now Less Burdensome For State Court Suits

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

Who Needs Proof? Not The Notice of Removal.

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

Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard Governing Removal of Class Action Cases to Federal Court

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

Removing a Barrier: The Supreme Court Holds That, Under CAFA, Notices of Removal Need Not Include Evidence Supporting the Amount...

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

No Proof Necessary: SCOTUS Rules Defendant’s Notice Of Removal Under CAFA Need Not Include Evidence of The Amount In Controversy

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

Supreme Court: Evidence of Amount in Controversy Not Required at Removal

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant removing a putative class action from state to federal court pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) need not submit evidence to...more

Supreme Court Confirms That A Notice Of Removal Requires Only A “Plausible Allegation” That The Amount In Controversy Has Been Met

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 United States Supreme Court Holds That a Defendant’s Notice of Removal Need Only Include a “Plausible Allegation” That the...

On December 15, 2014, the US Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC, et al. v. Owens.1 Writing for the 5 – 4 majority, Justice Ginsberg held that a defendant’s notice of removal pursuant to...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Fairness Act’s Removal Requirement: 'Liberal Rules' Do Not Require Evidence of Amount in...

Class action defendants need not include evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), thanks to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in...more

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Removing Class Actions to Federal Court

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

U.S. Supreme Court Eases CAFA Removals

Congress passed the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, in response to perceived (in fact real) concerns regarding potential abuses of the class action process. Among CAFA’s important provisions was the right to remove...more

Supreme Court Opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin v. Owens

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719. Unsurprisingly, the Court held that a notice of removal under the Class Action Fairness Act does not need to...more

Supreme Court Decides Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens

On December 15, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719, holding that a notice of removal to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a) and the Class...more

The Class Action Chronicle - Winter 2014

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...more

CAFA: Recent Developments on the Jurisdictional and Settlement Fronts

Since Congress enacted the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2005, the nation’s class action litigation has increasingly migrated to the federal stage, with plaintiffs bringing more class actions directly to federal court...more

In “Zombie” Class Action, Seventh Circuit Requires Plaintiffs to Present Evidence to Prove Home-State Exception to CAFA...

On Tuesday, the Seventh Circuit decided Myrick v. Wellpoint, Inc., Nos. 12-3882, 13-2230, 2014 WL 4073065 (Aug. 19, 2014), which highlights the necessity held that plaintiffs were required to produce evidence—and not merely...more

Has California Lost Its Jurisdictional Anchor For Securities Fraud Actions?

Does California’s securities fraud statute apply to offers and sales of securities that are made in other states, in Europe, or on the moon? Actually, there is no way to know. Formerly, California Corporations Code Section...more

Third Circuit Holds that Courts, Not Arbitrators, Should Rule on Classwide Arbitration

In Opalinski v. Robert Half International, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that where an arbitration clause is silent as to the availability of classwide arbitration, that issue should...more

Class Action Roundtable - July 2014

Executive Summary: MODERATOR: What are the implications of Daimler AG v. Bauman? How will the Court’s decision impact the ability to bring class actions against large, multi-site corporations? STEVEN ELLIS:...more

Federal Court Clarifies CAFA’s Jurisdictional Amount in State PAGA Cases

A judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California recently issued a pro-employer ruling with regard to the jurisdictional minimum amount in controversy required by the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA)...more

Common Flaws in Computer Fraud Class Actions: Lawsuits claiming unauthorized use of smartphone tracking technology are lacking key...

A number of class actions have recently been filed in federal district courts, predicated, in part, on alleged violations of the federal computer crime statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, complaining of tracking...more

Courts Find Removal Is Not Permitted Under CAFA Where Plaintiff Did Not Plead A Class Action Under Rule 23 Or Comparable State...

District Courts continue to shape the boundaries of CAFA jurisdiction in suits that are not pleaded as class actions. For example, the District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana held that defendants could not...more

A Class Action By Any Other Name Is Still A Class Action And Subject To CAFA

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand a collection against insurers brought on behalf of a certified class that had obtained a judgment in a separate action against...more

Food Litigation Newsletter - April 22, 2014

In This Issue: - Decisions ..Court Dismisses In Part for Lack of Specificity ..Court Dismisses Evaporated Cane Juice Claims Where Labels Disclosed Sugar Content ..Court Dismisses In Part for Lack of...more

Sweet(ener) Confusion: Court Divide Over Role of Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine in “Evaporated Cane Juice” Cases Grows

In Swearingen v. Santa Cruz Natural, Inc., No. C 13-04291 (N.D. Cal. April 2, 2014), Judge Illston of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted defendant’s motion to dismiss based on the primary...more

70 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3