Does a state, whose citizens are among the absent class members in a class action settlement, have Article III standing to challenge the supposed unfairness of the settlement? In Chapman v. Tristar Products, Inc., the Sixth...more
10/22/2019
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
CAFA ,
Class Action ,
Class Members ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
FRCP 24 ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Lack of Jurisdiction ,
Objection Procedures ,
Parens Patriae ,
Regulatory Authority ,
Settlement ,
Standing ,
State Regulators
The December 2018 revisions to Rule 23 are relatively minor, and early cases applying the amended rule confirm that no major changes have occurred. The Southern District of Iowa summed up the theme in Swinton v. SquareTrade,...more
We have been closely watching how courts have applied the Supreme Court’s Bristol-Myers Squibb decision in the class action context, and the early results are mixed. But the Northern District of Illinois made a big step in...more
The Supreme Court’s decision in China Agritech Inc. v. Resh means that class action plaintiffs can no longer rely on serial class actions to toll their statute of limitations indefinitely. Instead, the Supreme Court held that...more
6/13/2018
/ Appeals ,
China Agritech Inc v Resh ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Class Members ,
Equitable Tolling ,
FRCP 23 ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities Fraud ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Subsequent Litigation
Class actions have dual natures. They start out as only individual cases, but they can become massive, collective cases where the rights of absent parties are adjudicated all at once. In most respects, class certification...more