Supreme Court of the United States Class Action

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

Dart Cherokee: Shifting The Burden To Plaintiff in Federal Diversity Cases

Under Dart, a Plaintiff contesting that the jurisdictional threshold has not been met must now come forward with evidence that establishes the jurisdictional amount in controversy is not present. We’ve all seen this...more

Ninth Circuit First to Take Up Offers of Judgment After Campbell-Ewald

As we reported earlier this year in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663, 672 (2016), the Supreme Court held that a putative class action does not become moot when a defendant merely offers a named plaintiff full...more

Spokeo—New Hope for Defending Against ERISA Claims?

Last month, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13–1339 (May 16, 2016). Spokeo involved a lawsuit brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (FCRA). ...more

Supreme Court’s “Standing” Ruling in Spokeo and Its Impact on Pending and Future Litigation

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its much-anticipated ruling in Spokeo v. Robins, in which the Court considered whether Congress can confer Article III standing on a plaintiff to bring an action based on an alleged...more

Sixth Circuit Rejects Class Action Settlement With Key Documents Under Seal

All’s not fair in secretive class-action settlements. If class actions are the exception, then class-action settlements are a reflection of that exception. Specifically, the secrecy that might otherwise accompany...more

Who Can Sue Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act? A Claimant Must Now Have a Concrete Injury to Go to Court

On May 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in the closely watched case Spokeo, Inc. v. Thomas Robins et al., addressing the issue of standing under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The Court held that in...more

Recent Supreme Court Decision Will Likely Impact Damages in Large, Complex Actions

On March 22, 2016, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, 136 S. Ct. 1036 (2016), addressing the question of when statistical sampling evidence may be used to establish class-wide...more

Recent Supreme Court Decision Will Likely Impact Damages in Large, Complex Actions

On March 22, 2016, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Tyson Foods v. Bouaphakeo, 136 S. Ct. 1036 (2016), addressing the question of when statistical sampling evidence may be used to establish class-wide...more

Supreme Court’s Spokeo Decision Strengthens Standing Defense For Employers In FCRA And Other Statutory Class Actions

In an important victory for employers, the Supreme Court in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins held that a plaintiff does not have Article III standing to sue in federal court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and other federal...more

Spokeo May Raise the Bar for Standing in ADA Title III Cases

Seyfarth Synopsis: The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Spokeo decision may lead to more careful scrutiny of whether ADA Title III plaintiffs have a sufficiently “concrete” injury to confer jurisdiction in federal court. As...more

Spokeo – Half a Loaf, Maybe More, from the Supreme Court

We can’t stand no-injury class actions – those that allege only “I got exactly what the product I paid for, and wasn’t hurt, but for X reason I paid ‘too much’ for it.” Such litigation is a waste of time and money, and is...more

Post-Tyson Foods, Defendants Should Take the Offensive in Discovery Sampling

Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Tyson Foods and in light of the greater emphasis on proportionality in the amended Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, defendants can expect to see an increase in the use of sampling in...more

Class Dismissed . . . But not Quite: Supreme Court to Review Appealability of Class Certification Denials When Plaintiffs...

Does a federal court have jurisdiction to review an order denying class certification after the named plaintiffs voluntarily dismiss their claims with prejudice? That is the question the Supreme Court will consider in...more

Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins: What Does It Mean for TCPA Lawsuits?

As reported in our recent TCPA Connect, on May 16 the United States Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated ruling in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. The High Court ruled that a plaintiff must show a "concrete" injury-in-fact to...more

SCOTUS decides FDCPA case

On May 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held in Sheriff v. Gillie that an independent contractor to the Ohio Attorney General (OAG) did not mislead consumers in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act...more

Will Spokeo Impact Standing In Data Breach Cases?

Despite months of anticipation, the majority opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins reads more like a teacher (the Supreme Court) telling a student (the Ninth Circuit) to go back and show the work behind a long division answer...more

Contractor's Use of AG Letterhead Not a Violation of FDCPA, Supreme Court Holds

The U.S. Supreme Court has unanimously held that an independent contractor to the Ohio Attorney General did not mislead consumers in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) when it used the Attorney...more

Dual Decisions Provide Narrow Path for Plaintiffs to Establish Standing in Data Breach and Cybersecurity Suits

Last week, decisions by the United States Supreme Court and the Northern District of Georgia provided further guidance regarding the narrow path required for a class action plaintiff to successfully establish Article III...more

Supreme Court Vacates Ninth Circuit Decision in Spokeo, Remands for Analysis of Concrete Harms

On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Spokeo v. Robins, which posed the question of whether Article III standing requires a plaintiff to have a concrete injury when alleging a statutory violation under the...more

Concrete and Particularized Part II: What Spokeo May Mean for Class Actions

This blog post is the second in a series of posts that Baker & Hostetler LLP is devoting to the significant decision Robins v. Spokeo, No. 13-1339, 537 U.S. ___ (2016) (Spokeo). Monday’s post focused on Spokeo’s effect on...more

Supreme Court: ‘Actual Injury’ Needed to Establish Standing to Sue for Violations of Fair Credit Reporting Act

Plaintiffs must show they suffered from an actual injury, not just a “bare procedural violation,” in order to sue in federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in its long-awaited decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No....more

Supreme Court Holds Congress Cannot Confer Automatic Standing By Statute

The Supreme Court has issued its much anticipated opinion in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, 578 U.S. ___ (2016). The Supreme Court granted certiarori in Spokeo to determine whether a bare violation of a statute – the...more

Supreme Court Punts On Issue Of "Standing" To Pursue Class Action Claims

Earlier this week, by a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court issued a “no decision” decision on an issue important to employers facing class action litigation. The Court decided that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals needed to review...more

No Concrete Harm, No Foul: The Supreme Court’s Spokeo Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday announced a decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins (No. 13-1339) that may have far-reaching implications for plaintiffs seeking to enforce purely statutory rights under statutes like the Fair...more

Supreme Court: Class Action Plaintiffs Must Show ‘Concrete’ Harm to Satisfy Article III

In a 6-2 decision, the Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Alito, held that the Ninth Circuit’s Article III standing analysis in Robins v. Spokeo was incomplete because it focused solely on whether the plaintiff...more

902 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 37
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.
×