The Roundup covers notable class action decisions each month from federal appellate courts, as well as notable Supreme Court class action cert petitions....more
Welcome to the inaugural edition of Classified Monthly: A Roundup of Class Action Decisions from Federal Appellate Courts. The Roundup normally will arrive in your inbox the first week of each month and will cover the...more
To bring a collective competition action in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (“CAT”), a proposed class representative first has to have their claim certified by the CAT. The CAT’s approach to certification is therefore an...more
Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an employer-friendly decision in Viking River Cruises v. Moriana. There, it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA)...more
Nearly three years after its decision in Johnson v. NPAS Solutions LLC, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals remains the only circuit in the nation to categorically bar class representatives from receiving incentive awards....more
More than two years ago, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, 975 F.3d 1244 (11th Cir. 2020) that incentive payments for lead plaintiffs in class-action lawsuits are improper. After...more
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on December 16, 2020 in TransUnion, LLC v. Ramirez on the question of “[w]hether either Article III or Rule 23 permits a damages class action where the vast majority of the class...more
On September 17, 2020, in a first-of-its-kind opinion, the Eleventh Circuit reversed in part a district court’s approval of a class action settlement, holding that “incentive awards”—payments routinely provided to named...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
Here at FCRAland, we frequently discuss cases applying the Supreme Court’s 2016 case Spokeo v. Robbins. That case specified that, for a plaintiff to have standing under FCRA, the plaintiff would need to allege an injury that...more
Just days ago I wrote about a district court opinion rejecting a tender of complete relief to pick off a named class representative’s claim in a putative TCPA class action. Well today the Second Circuit Court of Appeal has...more
Can a named class representative continue to represent a putative TCPA class action even after a Defendant pays the Plaintiff the highest amount he/she could possibly recover on their individual claim? That question was left...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
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
Takeaway: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in January 2016 in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of judgment has no legal effect and therefore does not serve to moot a class action. 136 S. Ct. 663...more
In January 2016, the Supreme Court issued its Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez decision and definitely ruled that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 could not be used to moot the claims of a named plaintiff. Prior to that ruling,...more
On June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker. Baker resolves a Circuit split concerning whether a plaintiff, after losing a class certification battle, can effectively manufacture...more
In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, a decision released in January, a majority of the United States Supreme Court held that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of judgment by a defendant cannot moot a putative class action....more
Statistics are kind of a holy grail of class action litigation. Everyone seems to know that they exist, but their understanding is shadowy and the quest to find valid statistical models often proves elusive. Last month’s...more
In Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663 (Jan. 20, 2016), the Supreme Court resolved a split among courts and held that an unaccepted settlement offer of complete individual relief does not moot the plaintiff’s lawsuit. ...more
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of complete relief does not moot a plaintiff's individual claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third...more
In a much-anticipated decision, the U.S. Supreme Court recently affirmed a $2.9 million judgment in a class action for unpaid overtime wages against Tyson Foods Inc. (Tyson) in which employee class members relied on...more
If you read one thing... - SCOTUS declines to adopt broad or categorical rules governing use of representative evidence in class actions, holding instead that the use of such evidence will depend on the purpose for...more
As my colleague, Katherine Kayatta, alluded to in her detailed post earlier this week, much of the initial commentary on the Supreme Court’s Tyson Foods decision has been to the effect that the decision may crack open the...more