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®
The U.S. Supreme Court last week declined to resolve a potentially landmark issue in class action law. In the closely watched case of Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, the Court delivered a per curiam...more
On June 5, 2025, the US Supreme Court dismissed as improvidently granted a closely watched case that could have clarified whether federal courts may certify damages class actions under Rule 23 when the class includes both...more
Post-TransUnion, A Closer Examination of Threshold for Article III Standing- Class action trials are rare. The potential magnitude of an adverse verdict, even when improbable, makes the risks of trial unpalatable for...more
During the week of 21 June 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions that ultimately remove any doubt that class representatives must present class-wide evidence of harm at the class-certification stage,...more
On April 6, 2021, the Ninth Circuit for the first time addressed a plaintiff’s burden to show predominance at the class certification stage. In Olean Wholesale Grocery Coop. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, the court joined the...more
Interpreting Bristol-Myers : Are Unnamed Members of Nationwide Class Actions ‘Parties’? If So, When? In 2017, the Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California (BMS), holding that a...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Although federal courts are certifying class actions at a record rate, a recent opinion by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio demonstrates that the requirements of Rule 23 are not...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 United States Supreme Court recently handed the defense bar a useful tool in stemming the tide of class action lawsuits. In the area of employment law, claims for violations of federal wage and hour laws, violations of...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
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
After years of uncertainty, the United States Supreme Court has revisited one of its most important class action opinions, and in doing so, set limits on the filing of successive class actions. In China Agritech, Inc. v....more
It is easy to overgeneralize the outcome of a legal dispute as pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant to paint a picture of which way a court is leaning and who is finding favor. This week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its second...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