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 dismissed the petition in Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Davis on procedural grounds as having been “improvidently granted” and declined to address the underlying merits question...more
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
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
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 November 14, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court declined StarKist Company’s petition to review the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s en banc opinion upholding certification of three subclasses of tuna purchasers in Olean...more
On June 21, 2021, the Supreme Court issued an opinion by Justice Barrett on the reliance element of a securities fraud claim. In a unanimous portion of her opinion (the “Decision”), Justice Barrett held that courts may...more
On August 10, 2021, a divided Ninth Circuit panel vacated a trial court’s certification of two nationwide classes, finding that the defendant had not waived its personal jurisdiction objection to class certification by not...more
The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly declined to resolve a question that has sharply divided the Circuits: whether a class may be certified even though it contains uninjured members. See e.g., Tyson Foods, Inc. v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari to review a Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision that could alter the landscape of class action litigation under Rule 10b-5. The issue in Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. v....more
In Nutraceutical Corporation v. Lambert, No. 17-1094, 586 U.S. __ (Feb. 26, 2019), the United States Supreme Court once again endorsed the old adage, “When you snooze, you lose”—at least sometimes. Under Federal Rule of Civil...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