News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court to Address Standard of Removal Under the Class Action Fairness Act

Last year in Standard Fire v. Knowles, 133 S. Ct. 1345 (2013), the U.S. Supreme Court held that class action plaintiffs could not avoid removal to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) by...more

Winding the Removal Clock: The Second Circuit Clarifies The Deadline for Removal Under the Class Action Fairness Act

When faced with a state court lawsuit, a critical consideration for any defendant is the forum in which to litigate – whether to remain in state court or, if possible, remove the case to federal court. In the case of a...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

Supreme Court Accepts Certiorari In CAFA Removal Case

On April 7, 2014, the Supreme Court accepted certiorari review in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719, to resolve a circuit split regarding whether the Class Action Fairness Act requires a removing...more

Supreme Court To Decide Evidentiary Requirements for Removal Notices in Class Actions

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to review the issue of what, if any, evidence a defendant must present in a notice of removal to remove a case to federal court based on the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In granting the...more

Supreme Court To Decide CAFA Pleading Standard

On April 7th, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC v. Owens, a case originating from the Tenth Circuit. In that case, the Court will resolve a circuit split over the pleading...more

Supreme Court To Decide Whether All Evidence Supporting Removal Under The Class Action Fairness Act Must Be Submitted With The...

To remove a civil action from state court to federal court, the defendant must “file … a notice of removal … containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal.” 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a). Today, the Supreme Court...more

Knowles Gives Employer Second Chance To Seek And Win Removal

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that neither a damages waiver nor the passage of more than 30 days after receipt of a complaint prevented an employer’s removal under CAFA. A putative class of California store...more

Plaintiffs Can’t Evade Removal Under Class Action Fairness Act By Suing For Only Declaratory Relief

Over the years, the plaintiffs’ bar has used a wide variety of stratagems to try to prevent defendants from removing class actions to federal court. We’ve previously blogged about several of them. A recent Eleventh Circuit...more

Ninth Circuit “Chases” Away Another Option for Removing PAGA Actions to Federal Court

In yet another setback for employers seeking to remove California wage and hour cases to federal court, the Ninth Circuit held that the federal Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) provides federal courts with no basis to...more

The Class Action Chronicle - Spring 2014

This is the third 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

Ninth Circuit Clarifies CAFA Removal Requirements

In its recent per curiam opinion in Rea v. Michaels Stores, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit clarified rules and procedures relevant to defendants seeking to remove cases to federal court. In Rea,...more

When 30 Days Just Isn’t Enough: The Ninth Circuit Rules that Defendants’ Right to Remove May Not be Limited to 30 Days

In Rea v. Michaels Stores, No. 14-55008, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 2928 (9th Cir. Feb. 18, 2014), the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s order remanding a wage-and-hour class complaint to state court, ruling that the...more

Removal Evidence Need Not Be Perfect and Declaratory Relief Alone May Satisfy CAFA Amount-in-Controversy Requirement, says the...

Answering a question left undecided in other circuits, the Eleventh Circuit held in South Florida Wellness, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co., No. 14-10001 (Feb. 14, 2014) that a complaint seeking only declaratory relief “can be...more

State Attorney General Parens Patriae Actions Are Not Removable to Federal Court as CAFA “Mass Actions”

This week the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp. that parens patriae actions in which the State is the sole plaintiff are not “mass actions” under the Class Action Fairness...more

Supreme Court: AG Suits Not Removable Under CAFA

On January 14, 2014, the Supreme Court held in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp. (Hood) that a suit filed by a state as the sole plaintiff does not constitute a "mass action" under the Class Action Fairness Act...more

Supreme Court Holds That State Attorney General Suits Brought on Behalf of a State's Residents Cannot Be Removed to Federal Court...

On January 14, 2014, in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that lawsuits brought by state attorneys general seeking, among other things, recovery of funds for the benefit...more

State Attorneys General Served “home cooking” by the Supreme Court of the United States

On January 14, 2014, in Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp., the Supreme Court held that a parens patriae action (one brought by the state on behalf of its injured citizens) does not constitute a ‘mass action’ and cannot be...more

State Attorney General Lawsuit Not Removable under CAFA, Supreme Court Holds

Resolving a conflict in the circuits, the U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously ruled that a parens patriae action brought by a state attorney general is not removable from state to federal court as a “mass action” under the...more

SCOTUS: Mississippi AG Suit is not a Removable CAFA Mass Action

In Mississippi ex rel. Jim Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., Case No. 12-1036 (U.S. Jan. 14, 2014), the United States Supreme Court reversed the Fifth Circuit’s decision and held that a statewide antitrust lawsuit brought by the...more

Book Review: The Class Action Fairness Act: Law And Strategy

In nearly nine years on the books, the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) has generated a host of decisions interpreting its provisions. Because the state of the law on CAFA — and class actions in general — is in...more

SCOTUS Considers the Fate of State AG Lawsuits under CAFA in Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp.

On November 6, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in Mississippi v. AU Optronics Corp., Docket No. 12-1036. This case comes out of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and...more

Tenth Circuit Provides Guidance On The Evidentiary Requirements Of CAFA Removal

In Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-603, --- F.3d ----, 2013 WL 5200399 (10th Cir. Sept. 17, 2013) (Hartz, J., dissenting), the 10th Circuit denied a petition for rehearing en banc of a petition to...more

It Just Got Easier To Remove Class Actions

In Rodriguez v. AT&T Mobility Services LLC the Ninth Circuit cited recent United States Supreme Court precedent to make it more difficult for class action plaintiffs to pursue their claims in state court. Rodriquez has...more

42 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2