Supreme Court of the United States Class Action Fairness Act

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

Employment Flash (June 2014)

In This Issue: - NLRB Recess Appointments Unconstitutional - SEC Brings First-Ever Employment Retaliation Claim - EEOC Challenges Employer Severance Agreements - New York State Transportation Industry...more

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

Recent Cases of Note

District of New Jersey Denies Class Certification in Title Insurance Case on Grounds of Ascertainability - In the latest in a series of decisions from courts in the Third Circuit regarding ascertainability of a...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

Seventh Circuit Reverses Remand Order Based On Supreme Court’s Knowles Decision

In what may become a more common trend in CAFA litigation based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, ––– U.S. ––––, 133 S.Ct. 1345 (2013), the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court’s...more

All or Nothing? The U.S. Supreme Court to Address Whether Evidence In Support of Removal Must Be Submitted with the Notice of...

On April 7, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted the petition for writ of certiorari in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, No. 13-719 (“Dart Cherokee”), to address whether a defendant must include...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

Dart Cherokee: SCOTUS to Hear Case on CAFA Pleading Requirements

The Supreme Court will now decide whether a 2006 Seventh Circuit decision on Class Action Fairness Act pleading requirements was correct. The Court granted certiorari today in a case that will resolve whether defendants...more

Parens Patriae Actions Are Not Removable Under CAFA: A Unanimous Decision of the United States Supreme Court Has Broad...

The United States Supreme Court delivered a unanimous win to state attorneys general earlier this year. In January, the Court held in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics, 134 S. Ct. 736 (2014), that parens patriae suits...more

Can You Keep Up? Emergence of CFPB and Significant Developments Transform Consumer Finance Landscape

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, Congress passed significant financial system reform legislation, the Dodd-Frank Act, which created a new regulator of financial institutions, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau...more

Antitrust and Competition Newsletter - February 2014

U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Parens Patriae Suits Are Not Removable to Federal Court as “Mass Actions” Under the Class Action Fairness Act - On Jan. 14, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a parens patriae...more

SCOTUS: States are Not “Persons” Under CAFA

In 2005, Congress enacted the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”) to change the procedures for interstate class action suits. Notably, CAFA created a new type of suit called a “mass action,” which is any civil suit for...more

"Mass Tort and Consumer Class Action Outlook: A Mixed Landscape for Defendants in 2014"

Recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court have improved the landscape for defendants seeking to fend off mass tort and consumer class actions. In Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013), the Supreme Court tightened...more

"US Supreme Court Cases to Watch in 2014"

The U.S. Supreme Court will rule on numerous significant cases in 2014, involving such issues as presidential power, affirmative action, campaign contributions, environmental regulations, intellectual property, commercial...more

Five Takeaways from the Supreme Court’s AU Optronics Decision

Court’s decision provides key takeaways for class action defendants, including how the decision limits the use of CAFA’s mass action provision to suits that actually name 100 or more persons as plaintiffs....more

SCOTUS Holds State AG Action Not A Mass Action Subject To CAFA

On January 14, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that an action filed by a state attorney general seeking restitution on behalf of hundreds of the state’s citizens who are not themselves parties to the action is not a...more

Advertising News & Analysis - January 23, 2014

In this issue: - Former BCP Director Discusses how FTC Picked its Fights - Court Pierces the Veil on Anonymous Online Reviews - FTC Finds Green Diaper Claims Don’t Hold Water - A Warning Letter is...more

BakerHostetler 2013 Year-End Review of Class Actions (and what to expect in 2014)

I. Introduction - Library shelves will someday swell with history books about the U.S. Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice John Roberts. No doubt sensational cases about corporate speech, national...more

Supreme Court: Parens Patriae Suits Not “Mass Actions” under CAFA

On January 14, 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous opinion that parens patriae suits brought by states on behalf of their citizens do not constitute “mass actions” under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Miss....more

Suits Brought by State AGs Alone Not “Mass Actions”: SCOTUS Sides With 4th, 7th, and 9th Circuits in Clarifying CAFA’s Mass Action...

In Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 12-1036, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 645 (Jan. 14, 2014) the Supreme Court of the United States addressed the circuit split that arose after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeal’s holding...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 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

Meaning of "Mass Actions" Under CAFA clarified by SCOTUS

In one of its first decisions of the year, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a civil action filed solely by the State of Mississippi did not constitute a “mass action” under the Class Action Fairness Act...more

80 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4