In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
A few months ago, we wrote about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in Labcorp v. Davis. As we noted at the time, Labcorp raises a long-debated question of class-action law: Can a federal court certify a...more
On April 29, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, d/b/a Labcorp v. Davis et al., No. 24-304 (2025 Term) to determine whether certification is appropriate in a class...more
A New York federal district court recently dismissed a consolidated class action against Beech-Nut Nutrition Company (“Beech-Nut”), the manufacturer of baby food allegedly containing toxic levels of heavy metals, for failure...more
For many causes of action, a plaintiff is required to establish an actual “injury” caused by the alleged violation of law. That requirement can be a powerful barrier to class certification if individualized factual inquiries...more
An August 2024 decision by a panel of the U.S. Sixth Circuit in Speerly v. General Motors, which underscores key developments in the law governing class certification, Article III standing, and the treatment of manifest...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently dismissed an appeal in the case of Lewis v. Becerra, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The appellants sought...more
A recent Texas Supreme Court decision in a class action caught my eye because it addressed several significant class certification issues, including one that I’ve seen regularly and another that the court analyzed in a new...more
The Western District of Pennsylvania recently granted Spirit Airlines, Inc. (“Spirit Airlines”)’s Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss a class action brought by a putative class of plaintiffs who visited Spirit Airlines’ website...more
In Barclift v. Keystone Credit Services, LLC, the Philadelphia-based United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit determined that a Consumer did not have standing to sue under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act...more
On January 18, a court in the Eastern District of Wisconsin denied class certification in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case concluding that the factual issue of whether the proposed class members had suffered an...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: For the final blog in this series regarding the legacy of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (“TransUnion”), the Workplace Class Action blog closes its survey of federal Circuit Courts with key rulings from the...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: As reported here, for the two-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings regarding Article III standing in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez (“TransUnion”), the Workplace Class Action blog is providing a...more
On November 22, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision finding that the plaintiff lacked Article III standing in a putative class action brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)....more
On October 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a decision rejecting a district court’s finding that the so-called informational injury doctrine established Article III standing for the named plaintiff...more
Takeaway: In Drazen v. Pinto, 74 F.4th 1336 (11th Cir. 2023) (en banc), the Eleventh Circuit held a single “unwanted, illegal” text message sufficient to establish concrete injury for standing purposes. This holding...more
In the case of Drazen v. Pinto, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals sitting en banc ruled unanimously that plaintiffs who received a single unwanted telemarketing text message suffered a concrete injury. In 2019, Susan...more
The Eleventh Circuit has now joined seven other circuits in holding that receipt of unwanted text messages constitutes concrete injury for standing. On July 24, the Eleventh Circuit issued an en banc decision in Drazen v....more
The law can be funny. Not in a comedic way, but in a way that defies expectations about what is needed to bring a cause of action. Sometimes this is manifested in the quantum of evidence needed to bring an action and survive...more
In the intricate and often convoluted realm of TCPA litigation, the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Hall v. Smosh Dot Com, Inc. stands as a beacon, illuminating the complexities of Article III standing and the implications...more
The 2023 Carlton Fields Class Action Survey found that the second most successful class action defense is the lack of any actual injury suffered by some or all of the class. It also found that this defense made a big jump in...more
The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently stayed Simpson v. J.G. Wentworth Co. in light of the Eleventh Circuit's pending en banc decision in Drazen v. Pinto. Both cases involve similar Telephone...more
Federal courts of appeals have disagreed on whether a named plaintiff in a proposed class action can sue defendants who have not injured that plaintiff but allegedly have injured putative class members. This is not an...more
In Plutzer v. Bankers Trust, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York de novo; and emphasized that a plaintiff must allege concrete,...more
Takeaway: Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Clapper v. Amnesty Int’l USA, 568 U.S. 398, 416 (2013), that plaintiffs “cannot manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves based on . . . hypothetical...more
Takeaway: We have written a number of articles about standing issues arising in data breach class actions. See, e.g., Data breach class actions: Third Circuit sets out parameters for Article III injury-in-fact (Oct. 27,...more