Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
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, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a writ of certiorari as improvidently granted, leaving unresolved a significant question regarding class-action certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The question...more
In a closely watched case with major implications for class action litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a long-simmering legal question: Can a class be certified if it includes members who suffered no injury? On...more
On June 5, 2025, in Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed as improvidently granted a case presenting the question of whether a certified class properly may include both injured and...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
On February 25, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lackey v. Stinnie that plaintiffs who gain preliminary injunctive relief before an action becomes moot do not qualify as “prevailing parties” for attorney’s fees under 42...more
At the close of 2023, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of petitioner Acheson in Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer as moot and vacated the underlying decision by the First Circuit that Laufer had constitutional standing to...more
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Acheson Hotels, LLC v. Laufer, a case that we have summarized in prior blog posts. Just months ago, there was doubt whether the Supreme Court would hear the case at...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 Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663 (2016), the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant’s unaccepted offer of complete relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 did not moot a class plaintiff’s...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
Lanham Act False Advertising - Lanham Act Liability for Native Advertising Violations - Casper Sleep, Inc. v. Mitcham, --- F. Supp. 3d ---, No. 16 Civ. 3224 (JSR), 2016 WL 4574388 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 1, 2016) - ...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: As profiled in our recent publication of the 13th Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings have a profound impact on employers and the tools they may utilize to...more
As we reported earlier this year in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S. Ct. 663, 672 (2016), the Supreme Court held that a putative class action does not become moot when a defendant merely offers a named plaintiff full...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
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
We previously reported on two Rule 68 offer of judgment cases: Campbell-Ewald Co. v Gomez, 136 S.Ct. 663 (2016), see Supreme Court Rules Unaccepted Rule 68 Offer of Judgment Cannot Moot Class Action , in which the Supreme...more
The Ninth Circuit has answered questions left open by the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez decision by finding a putative class action was not moot even where the defendant deposited the offered funds into...more
One of the strategies employed by class-action defendants has been to submit an offer of settlement pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the full amount of the putative class representative's claim....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
A New York federal court has held that a defendant’s payment of the amount of plaintiff’s TCPA claim plus costs to the clerk of the court required entry of judgment for the plaintiff and ended the case. Leyse v. Lifetime...more
Is the pick-off strategy to moot class actions still alive in the Southern District of New York? Possibly. Last month we reported on Brady v. Basic Research, L.L.C. – the first decision to interpret the Supreme Court’s...more
Nuclear Plant Maintenance Manager's Whistleblower Claim Was Properly Dismissed - Sanders v. Energy Northwest, 2016 WL 560809 (9th Cir. 2016) - David W. Sanders, a maintenance manager for Energy Northwest (a...more