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®
Welcome back to the Class Action & MDL Roundup! This edition covers notable class actions from the fourth quarter of 2024. In this edition, an overdue audiobook suit is shelved, an old case gets new reps and new...more
Earlier this year, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued its decision in Lytle v. Nutramax Labs, Inc., finding that a class action plaintiff may rely on a model to demonstrate that damages are susceptible to...more
On February 2, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a significant decision holding that a putative class representative does not need to establish an administratively feasible method to...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: “Objector blackmail” occurs in the class settlement approval process when a few class members object to a proposed settlement and, after the district court has overruled their objections, pursue appeals...more
On January 24, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit announced a new standard by which a district court should evaluate whether notice of an FLSA collective action should be sent to employees who may be...more
The Supreme Court meant what it said in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh – that is the primary lesson from the First Circuit’s January 30th decision in In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. ...more
In Nielen-Thomas v. Concorde Investment Servs., LLC, No. 18-2875, 2019 WL 302766 (7th Cir. Jan. 24, 2019), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act...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
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
The U.S. Supreme Court reached a decision in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh holding that the equitable tolling rule does not apply to subsequently filed class action claims. ...more
In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, the Supreme Court earlier this month held that pending class actions do not toll the limitations period for successive class actions. The ruling limits plaintiffs’ ability to bring successive...more
On June 11, 2018, in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, the United States Supreme Court held that the American Pipe tolling doctrine, which suspends the running of the statute of limitations applicable to the claims of individual...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court reigned in plaintiffs’ ability to file new class action suits outside the statute of limitations. The Court decided in China Agritech that, following denial of class...more
Class-action plaintiffs cannot toll the statute of limitations indefinitely by filing copycat class actions until certification sticks, the U.S. Supreme Court held on Monday, June 11, in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh. The...more
The U.S. Supreme Court bars previously absent class members from bringing subsequent class actions outside the applicable limitations period. The Supreme Court’s decision in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh cements a new limit...more
When does time run out on filing a class action? Under the U.S. Supreme Court's seminal decisions in American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah and Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. Parker, a timely class complaint tolls the statute of...more
The Supreme Court held unanimously on June 11 that American Pipe tolling does not apply to successive class actions brought outside the statute of limitations. The case, China Agritech v. Resh, resolves a circuit split over...more
The legal world is abuzz with the ripples created by a recent US Supreme Court decision on the statute of limitations in class actions. A recent post in the Epstein Becker Wage & Hour Defense Blog makes some interesting...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court held in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, No. 17-432, 584 U.S. __, 2018 WL 2767565 (2018), that the equitable tolling doctrine established by its landmark decision, American Pipe v. Utah, does...more
In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the filing of a class action complaint does not toll a statute of limitations period for later-filed class actions raising the same claims. The...more
In China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, the Supreme Court recently held that pending class actions do not toll the limitations period for successive class actions. The ruling limits plaintiffs’ ability to bring successive class...more
The United States Supreme Court’s June 11, 2018 decision in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, clarified the scope of a decades-old equitable tolling rule for class actions, holding that the Court’s 1974 opinion in American Pipe &...more
This week, in the closely watched case of China Agritech v. Resh, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important class action ruling, holding that the tolling principles announced in its earlier American Pipe decision do not...more
Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court in China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, No. 17-342, in which Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Kennedy, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Kagan, and Gorsuch joined. Justice Sotomayor filed...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that a plaintiff cannot file a class action outside the applicable statute of limitations merely because an unsuccessful prior class action tolled the limitations period for individual claims....more