Mass Torts vs. Class Actions: A Tale of Two Strategies
Eighth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of Putative Class Claims
Class Action | Eleventh Circuit Reinstates No Hire Antitrust Claims Against Burger King
John Lewis of BakerHostetler Discusses Use of Social Media in Gawker Class Action
Wearables and the Future of Intellectual Property Law
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 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
In Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, the Supreme Court of the United States resolved a circuit split over whether district courts must stay proceedings while an interlocutory appeal of a denial of a motion to compel arbitration is...more
Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, 2021 WL 2965438 (July 15, 2021) - On July 15, 2021, the California Supreme Court issued a long-awaited decision, Ferra v. Loews Hollywood Hotel, LLC, regarding the rate at which premium...more
The latest trends and developments in the class action world. Since our last update was published, the United States Supreme Court has addressed a number of appeals involving class actions. Requirement of Concrete...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
On May 26, 2021, the Fifth Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) putative class action arising from the transmission of a single text message to the plaintiff. The...more
The Supreme Court ruled on several cases involving class actions in the last few months. A case awaiting certiorari could dramatically change the jurisdictional requirements for plaintiffs in class actions across the country....more
On December 2, 2019, the United States government submitted a brief to the Supreme Court urging it to deny review of a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling holding a provision of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA)...more
On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously ruled that state wage and hour laws do not apply to offshore drilling workers where federal law addresses the relevant issue. In Parker Drilling Management...more
In a rare decision applying the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. §1331 et seq.(“OCSLA”), the United States Supreme Court has clarified, re-affirmed and perhaps (given the breadth of its opinion) expanded the...more
U.S. Supreme Court reaffirms primacy of federal law on Outer Continental Shelf holding state law may not be adopted where federal law already addresses the issue. In Parker Drilling Management Services Ltd. v. Newton, 587...more
Workers on oil drilling platforms off the coast of California are covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), not California’s overtime and wage laws, the U.S. Supreme Court has held unanimously. Parker Drilling...more
On June 10, 2019, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that state wage and hour laws do not apply to certain drilling rig employees working off the California coast. The rig workers argued that California law...more
By a unanimous 9-0 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday declined to extend California’s wage-and-hour laws to employees working on offshore drilling platforms subject to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (Parker...more
On June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Parker Drilling Management Services, Ltd. v. Newton, No. 18-389, holding that state law does not apply to the Outer Continental Shelf when federal law addresses...more
The Supreme Court of the United States issued the following decision this morning: Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela, No. 17-988: Respondent Frank Varela, an employee of petitioner Lamps Plus, brought a putative class action in...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
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
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
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