Supreme Court Limits American Pipe Tolling to Individual Claims

Weiner Brodsky Kider PC
Contact

Weiner Brodsky Kider PC

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that its prior ruling in American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah (1974) did not allow the filing of successive class actions following the denial of class certification and after the statute of limitations has run.  The Court clarified that American Pipe’s doctrine of equitable tolling for class action suits is limited to only putative class members who wish to sue individually when the initial attempt at class certification fails. Thus, a putative class action plaintiff who waits out the statute of limitations is not permitted to piggyback on an earlier, timely filed class action.

In this case, putative class members brought a third class action against a company alleging securities violations after the statute of limitations had expired.  While the district court dismissed the plaintiff’s class action as untimely, the Ninth Circuit reversed. The Ninth Circuit reasoned that the application of American Pipe tolling to successive class actions would promote the economy of litigation by reducing incentives for other putative lead-plaintiffs to file protective class suits while the initial certification motion is pending.

In reversing and remanding the Ninth Circuit’s decision, the Court explained that American Pipe tolls the limitation period only for individual claims because economy of litigation favors delaying those claims until after a class-certification denial.  Any additional class action filings, however, should be made early on, soon after the commencement of the first action seeking class certification.  This is because efficiency favors the early assertion of competing class-representative claims, from which the district court can select the best plaintiff to represent the class, as explained by the Court.  Further, the Court stated that there was no showing that this ruling would substantially increase the number of protective class action filings, given that several Courts of Appeals have already read American Pipe in this way and there was no showing that these Circuit Courts have experienced a disproportionate number of protective class action filings.

This decision resolves a Circuit split, where some Circuit Courts, including the Ninth Circuit, had applied American Pipe tolling to successive class actions while others did not.

The case is China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, and is available here.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Weiner Brodsky Kider PC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Weiner Brodsky Kider PC
Contact
more
less

Weiner Brodsky Kider PC on:

Reporters on Deadline

Related Case Law

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.