Bucking a recent trend and departing from both the Second Circuit’s Katz decision and the Third Circuit’s Kamal decision, the Eleventh Circuit found that a plaintiff had standing to settle a FACTA claim on behalf of a class....more
We wrote recently about how the certiorari petition in Zappos.com, Inc. v. Stevens was a possible vehicle to put the question of standing in data breach cases back before the Supreme Court. Alas, the Court denied the...more
Data breach plaintiffs often have a very difficult time stating a concrete injury, and courts have wrestled with whether these plaintiffs can file suit in federal court. We have been watching this issue and writing about it...more
In recent years, courts have reached divergent conclusions about the circumstances in which a damages class containing uninjured persons can be certified. Although there is some room to debate what constitutes injury, it is...more
11/12/2018
/ Article III ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
De Minimis Claims ,
FRCP 23(b)(3) ,
Generic Drugs ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Reversal ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Standing ,
Substantial Evidence
We’ve already written about Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that all federal plaintiffs, even those alleging a statutory violation, must have suffered a real, concrete...more
3/28/2018
/ Article III ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Data Breach ,
Debit and Credit Card Transactions ,
Dismissals ,
FACTA ,
FDCPA ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Motion to Vacate ,
Personally Identifiable Information ,
Remand ,
Removal ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing ,
Statutory Damages ,
Statutory Violations ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins (No. 13-1339), which addresses the question of whether a bare allegation of a statutory violation, unaccompanied by...more