Monumental Win in Data Breach Class Action: A Case Study — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Ad Law Tool Kit Show – Episode 6 – Mitigating Class Action Exposure
Mass Torts vs. Class Actions: A Tale of Two Strategies
Fierce Competition Podcast | Letter From London: The Rise of UK Class Actions and the Competition Appeal Tribunal
JONES DAY TALKS®: Collective Actions in Spain: A Look Around and the View Ahead
Entertainment Law Update Episode 160 – August/September 2023
JONES DAY TALKS®: Class Actions Worldview Guide: Part 1–The United States and European Union
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
2022 Year in Review and Look Ahead Crossover With FCRA Focus - The Consumer Finance Podcast
2022 Year in Review and Look Ahead Crossover With The Consumer Finance Podcast - FCRA Focus
Fifth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Striking of Class Allegations
Podcast: California Employment News - The Basics of Wage Statement Compliance (Part 1)
California Employment News: The Basics of Wage Statement Compliance (Part 1)
What Is Mass Arbitration and How Should Companies Protect Themselves? - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Webinar Recording – Assessing the Surge in Wiretap Litigation
Fashion Counsel: Privacy in the Retail Fashion Industry
Recent Trends in Class-Action Consumer Finance Litigation - The Consumer Finance Podcast
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS Rules on PAGA, Fifth Circuit Rules on COVID-19 Under WARN, Illinois Expands Bereavement Leave - Employment Law This Week®
ESG and SEC Enforcement: Securities & Exchange Commission v. Vale S.A and its Corporate Takeaways
Current Trends in FCRA Litigation - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Under the American Pipe doctrine, the commencement of a class action tolls the statute of limitations for absent class members. American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 554 (1974). The intent of this rule is to...more
The Third Circuit recently issued a decision holding that putative class members can benefit from equitable tolling even before a district court decides a motion for class certification. Aly v. Valeant Pharms. Int’l. Inc.,...more
On January 8, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California reinstated its June 2014 class certification order, holding that the named plaintiff’s full refund damages model was consistent with his...more
On February 26, the Supreme Court unanimously held in Nutraceutical Corporation v. Lambert that the text of Rule 23(f)—which sets a 14-day deadline for a party to petition a circuit court for permission to appeal a district...more
Circuit courts of appeal are solidifying the reach of the Supreme Court’s June 2018 decision in China Agritech v. Resh and curtailing the availability of equitable tolling in class contexts. The Supreme Court’s decision in...more
The Court's decision reinforces the inflexibility of the Federal Rules' deadline to file petitions for permission to appeal and cautions against reliance on equitable principles, even where diligence and good cause may exist....more
On February 26, 2019, the United States Supreme Court unanimously reversed a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which had held that Rule 23(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is...more
• The United States Supreme Court held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)’s 14-day deadline for parties to seek permission for interlocutory review of class certification decisions is not subject to equitable tolling....more
Last week, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed a Ninth Circuit decision, resolving a circuit split in ruling that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)’s 14-day deadline for a losing party to file a petition for permission...more
The U.S. Supreme Court suddenly seems to have a little time on its hands. Or at least on its mind. In two different class action cases on its docket this week, the question at hand was timeliness....more
On February 26, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that under Rule 23(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), a petition for permission to appeal an order decertifying a class must be filed within...more
To immediately appeal a federal district court’s order granting or denying class certification, a party must first seek permission from the relevant court of appeals “within 14 days after the order is entered.” Fed. R. Civ....more
This week, the Supreme Court in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert unanimously held that Rule 23(f) is not subject to equitable tolling. ...more
In a decision important to class action practice, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), which establishes a 14-day deadline to seek permission to appeal an order granting or denying class...more
On February 26, 2019, in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, the Supreme Court of the United States held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)’s 14-day deadline to request permission to appeal a district court’s order...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: To take an immediate appeal from a federal district court’s order granting or denying class certification, a party must first seek permission from the applicable court of appeals “within 14 days after the...more
On February 26, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, holding that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)’s requirement that a party petition a federal appeals court for...more
Today, the Supreme Court issued one decision: Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, No. 17-1094: In a class action against Nutraceutical Corporation, the district court decertified the class represented by Troy Lambert....more
The Supreme Court ruled yesterday, in Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, that the 14-day deadline under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) for petitioning a court of appeals to hear a discretionary appeal from a class...more
On September 26, 2018, Skadden hosted a webinar titled “US Supreme Court October 2018 Term.” Topics included some of the key business-related cases on the Supreme Court’s docket, including cases addressing antitrust, foreign...more
Our readers may recall that last year, the Supreme Court ruled that a plaintiff in a putative class action cannot subvert the discretionary nature of Rule 23(f) interlocutory review by voluntarily dismissing his case after...more
In a unanimous decision, the United States Supreme Court held on June 11, 2018 that a pending motion for class certification does not toll the statute of limitations for the filing of a new class action lawsuit by a putative...more
The U.S. Supreme Court closed out its most recent term, which began in October 2017, with a number of high-profile and ground-breaking decisions. ...more
On June 11, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, clarifying the scope of the tolling doctrine triggered by the filing of a class action. The doctrine, as established by earlier Court...more
This quarter’s issue includes summaries and associated court opinions of selected cases principally decided between February 2018 and May 2018. ...more