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

Supreme Court Revives LIBOR Antitrust Appeal in Gelboim et al. v. Bank of America Corp. et al.

On January 21, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a highly anticipated decision in a LIBOR-based antitrust class action suit allowing a plaintiff to immediately take a direct appeal from an order dismissing...more

U.S. Supreme Court Declines Review of California’s Iskanian Decision – California State and Federal Courts Remain Divided on PAGA...

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review California high court’s landmark decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, which held that arbitration agreements with mandatory class waivers are generally...more

No Waiver Of PAGA Representative Claims (Yet)

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in connection with the California Supreme Court’s decision in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angleles, LLC. Had the Court heard the Iskanian case, it was expected to...more

California’s Inconsistent Treatment of Pre-Dispute Waivers in Arbitration Agreements Will Remain in Place

This week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant review in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, leaving in place a California Supreme Court holding that pre-dispute arbitration agreements cannot require...more

U.S. Supreme Court Tires (For Now) of Playing “Whack-a-Mole” With California Over Arbitration

On January 20, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition for certiorari filed in CLS Transp. Los Angeles, LLC v. Iskanian, a case in which the California Supreme Court held that waivers of employees’ right to bring...more

The Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari in Iskanian only hardens the federal-state divide over PAGA claims

The divide continues between California and federal law on whether an arbitration agreement can entirely waive an employee’s ability to seek classwide or multiparty representational relief. The Supreme Court on Tuesday denied...more

PAGA Representative Claims Remain Alive After SCOTUS Denies Iskanian Review

Yesterday, the Supreme Court of the United States declined review of a state supreme court case that has sparked widespread flux in the landscape of class action arbitration waivers in California. In Iskanian v. CLS...more

Recent Federal Court Rulings Favor Airlines in Frequent-Flyer Cases

In April 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Airline Deregulation Act (ADA) preempted a frequent flyer program member's common law claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because the...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Removal Pleading Standard

The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more

Eleventh Circuit Affirms CAFA-Based Remand Order

Just two weeks after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a CAFA-based remand order where the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the...more

Preemption and Primary Jurisdiction After Pom Wonderful

After the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Pom Wonderful LLC v. The Coca-Cola Co., __ U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 2228 (2014), fear arose among national marketers that the decision would produce a wave of class actions challenging food,...more

The Beginning of the End for Class Action Litigation? Why Justice Scalia and the Current Supreme Court Are Good for Business

In American Express Co. v. Italian Colors Restaurant, the Supreme Court confirmed what it had only hinted at two years earlier in AT&T Mobility, LLC v. Concepcion. In a holding authored by Justice Scalia, the Court made plain...more

District Court Decertifies Class Where Damages Model Did Not Satisfy Supreme Court’s Requirements as Set Forth in Comcast Corp. v....

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently granted a defendant’s motion to decertify a class because plaintiff’s damages model was not consistent with his theory of liability as required...more

Third Circuit Weighs In On Burden of Proof and Evidentiary Standards Applicable to Cases Removed Under CAFA

Days before the Supreme Court’s decision addressing the requirements for CAFA notices of removal in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Third Circuit addressed the evidentiary requirements for surviving a...more

The Ten Most Significant Class Action Cases of 2014

Year-end lists are funny things. They take a sort-of arbitrary starting and stopping point, and then they cram a bunch of prejudices into a (usually) arbitrary number of items. And then people take them kind of seriously....more

Employment Flash - December 2014

In This Issue: - Supreme Court Rejects Security Screening Time Pay - NLRB Finalizes Union Election Rule - NLRB Reverses Employers’ Ability To Ban Employee Nonwork Email Use - EEOC Challenges Employer...more

Who Determines if Class Arbitration is Available? Why it Matters and Will the Supreme Court Decide

In the wake of several favorable U.S. Supreme Court decisions, companies increasingly are using arbitration agreements to control their exposure to class action liability. Although recent cases have reinforced the power of...more

California District Court Finds that CAFA’s Amount-in-Controversy Requirement was Satisfied; Denies Motion to Remand

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied plaintiff’s motion to remand, holding that plaintiff’s claim for unpaid wages and overtime satisfied CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement. ...more

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

483 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 20