eDiscovery Case Law Podcast: How Failing to Meet and Confer Effectively Can Lead to Sanctions
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 305: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 2 – Discovery)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Direct Examination: To Lead or Not to Lead
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 416: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 224: Listen and Learn -- Service of Process (Civ Pro)
The Only Rule of Multidistrict Litigation Is...
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 208: Listen and Learn -- Motions to Dismiss a Case
Practicing Before the U.S. Supreme Court | Kannon Shanmugam | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Amended Rules Five Months Later: Early Trends in Case Law and What It Means
Proposed FRCP Changes: Effect on eDiscovery, RIM & IG (CLE)
On June 5, 2025, the Supreme Court declined to decide the question, certified in Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Davis, as to “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed as improvidently granted the writ of certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Luke Davis, No. 22-55873, which raised whether a federal court may certify a...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued six decisions today: Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, No. 23-1039: This case addresses whether majority-group plaintiffs are held to a heighted evidentiary standard in...more
We’ve written previously about courts’ differing approaches to ascertainability — an implicit requirement under Rule 23 that class members must be identifiable. A pending petition for certiorari in Career Counseling, Inc. v....more
The US Supreme Court held oral arguments in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings d/b/a Labcorp v. Davis, et al. to consider the issue of whether a federal court can certify a class when some of the members of the...more
The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Labcorp v. Davis (No. 24-304), a case that arrived at the Court to resolve a fundamental question: "[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule...more
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
The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) heard oral argument this week in Labcorp v. Davis (No. 24-304) to determine “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
On April 29, 2025, the Supreme Court heard argument on an issue that has divided the circuits: “Whether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) when some members of the...more
A TCPA defendant in Arizona federal court recently uncovered what appears to be a previously undiscovered silver-lining to a default judgment: a denial of class certification....more
A Georgia appellate court recently affirmed the grant of class certification in favor of a class of Georgia individuals whose vehicles were booted in locations where no ordinance had been enacted authorizing the booting of...more
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Lytle v. Nutramax Laboratories, Inc. affirming the certification of a class of owners of elderly dogs, alleging that the...more
On January 24, 2024, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis (“LabCorp”),[1] to consider “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure...more
On January 24, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the case of Laboratory Corp. of America v. Davis, No. 24-0304, to decide “[w]hether a federal court may certify a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil...more
On January 24, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, No. 24-304, and will attempt to resolve a circuit split regarding whether federal district courts can...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
On January 24, 2025, the Court granted certiorari in three cases: Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Drummond, St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School v. Drummond, Nos. 24-394, 24-396: These consolidated...more
On December 17, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit handed down its published opinion in Stafford v. Bojangles’ Restaurants, Inc., 2024 WL 5131108 (4th Cir. 2024). In a rare move, the Fourth...more
Class certification decisions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mark a critical stage in any putative class action lawsuit. Rule 23(a) requires plaintiffs to prove, among other things, that “there are...more
Defendant, the largest video game distributor in the world, started out developing its own games, but now leaves this task to others and, instead, sells and distributes those games to end users through its Steam platform...more
Courts routinely refuse to certify consumer class actions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) based on the need for an individualized showing of the reliance element of a fraud or deceptive trade practices claim....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
Some forty years ago this author litigated a precedent setting case in the United States District Court in Newark, New Jersey and in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia. Among numerous reported decisions in...more
Plaintiffs sometimes seek to certify an “issues class” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(4) (or an equivalent state court rule) if they anticipate difficulty certifying the entire case for class treatment, but...more
The efficiency of the US class action regime hinges upon a core procedural mechanism: the class representative. By permitting a large group of plaintiffs with typically modest claims to rely on a small subset of...more