Class Action Blog by Carlton Fields Jorden Burt


November 20, 2014 10:46 AM | Posted by Michael A. Greenfield and Ben V. Seessel | Permalink
The Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of class certification of a class of investors based on the appellants’ failure to satisfy the numerosity and commonality requirements of Rule 23(a). Following the collapse of the Cheyne SIV in 2007, a structured investment vehicle structured by Morgan Stanley, the appellants sought to certify a class of sophisticated institutional investors that purchased notes from the SIV between 2004 and 2007. read more
November 19, 2014 8:28 AM | Posted by James M. Sconzo and Jacob R. Hathorn | Permalink
A complaint recently filed in the Southern District of Indiana alleges that the NCAA and its Division I Member Schools have jointly agreed and conspired to engage in a widespread pattern, policy, and practice of failing to pay division I student athletes in violation of the wage-and-hour provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). read more
November 18, 2014 8:53 AM | Posted by Clifton R. Gruhn and Ben V. Seessel | Permalink
The plaintiff filed a putative class action in Pennsylvania state court against two Pennsylvania defendants and one Virginia defendant, claiming that the defendants preyed on non-English speakers, illegally coercing them to enter into franchise agreements that circumvented the obligations of what were properly classified as employment relationships. read more
November 14, 2014 1:16 PM | Posted by Alina Alonso Rodriguez and Jaret Fuente | Permalink
The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the thirty-day time period for removal under CAFA is triggered when the plaintiffs’ complaint or plaintiffs’ subsequent other papers provide defendants with sufficient information to easily determine that the matter is removable, even if based on information provided by or previously available to defendants, and that “other paper” is defined broadly to include correspondence from the plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ counsel  to defendant concerning damages.  read more
November 10, 2014 11:01 AM | Posted by Dean A. Morande and Gary M. Pappas | Permalink
The District Court for the Southern District of California certified a consumer class asserting violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) by defendant Bennett Law, PLLC.  Plaintiff alleged that she received numerous automated debt collection calls on her cell phone from Bennett without her consent.  The law firm failed to respond to her complaint, and the court entered a default.  The court then proceeded to consider plaintiff’s motion for class certification.  The court stated that the entry of default does not alter the requirement that it conduct a rigorous analysis of the Rule 23 requirements for class certification under Dukes. read more
November 5, 2014 4:20 PM | Posted by Amy Lane Hurwitz and Gary M. Pappas | Permalink
The District Court for the Southern District of Ohio recently limited the American Pipe tolling doctrine in a fraud suit arising out of the sale of residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”).  Plaintiffs’ 2011 Ohio complaint alleged that defendants’ offering materials upon which they relied more than three years earlier violated the Federal Securities Act.  Defendants moved to dismiss based on the three year statute of repose contained in 15 U.S.C. §77m.  Plaintiffs responded that the Supreme Court’s 1974 American Pipe decision tolled of statute of limitations because they were putative members of a class sought to be certified in a 2008 New York action relating to some of the identical RMBS. read more
November 4, 2014 11:18 AM | Posted by Amanda Jesteadt Romfh and Jaret J. Fuente | Permalink
The Northern District of Illinois refused to restrict a defense counsel’s communications with putative class members, reasoning that the communications were not misleading or coercive.  The case arose when a “romantic getaway” motel reservations desk employee claimed that all phone calls made to or from the motel’s reservations desks were intercepted, recorded, and archived without consent of either party to the calls, and that some employees listened to the calls for their amusement.  read more
October 30, 2014 3:16 PM | Posted by Oleg Rivkin and Kristin Shepard | Permalink
In a class action involving claims of uncompensated, pre-shift off-the-clock work, a California federal magistrate denied plaintiffs’ motion for a protective order to prevent defendants from taking 196 depositions of absent class members as a part of a post-certification “pilot study” designed to determine the variability in liability among the class members. read more
October 28, 2014 9:19 AM | Posted by Paul G. Williams and Kristin A. Shepard | Permalink
In granting a recent motion to strike class allegations, the Northern District of Illinois made two notable observations about such motions: first, they are not disfavored, but rather an appropriate device for determining whether a class action can proceed; and second, that in analyzing the putative class for conflicts, the court is not limited to the face of the complaint. read more
October 23, 2014 1:49 PM | Posted by Michael Greenfield and Ben Seessel | Permalink
The Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied plaintiffs’ motion to certify certain issues under Rule 23(c)(4) and 23(b)(2), holding that the presence of numerous individualized questions, choice-of-law concerns, and other inefficiencies in the putative class litigation made certification inappropriate.  Allstate had terminated over 6,200 agents, 90% of whom happened to be over the age of 40, offering four different severance options to the terminated agents.  Three of the options offered enhanced severance benefits but required the agents to execute a release in order to be entitled to them.  Plaintiffs sought certification of four issues regarding the validity of the release: 1) involuntariness under a federal standard with respect to plaintiff’s federal claims, 2) unconscionability, 3) unclean hands, and 4) an obscure “part and parcel” theory derived from antitrust jurisprudence read more
October 22, 2014 9:14 AM | Posted by Clifton R. Gruhn & Ben V. Seessel | Permalink
A California federal district court denied certification of two nationwide classes, each asserting a price-fixing conspiracy for optical disk drives (“ODD”), because the plaintiffs’ experts failed to provide a viable methodology for establishing class-wide antitrust injury. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants colluded to fix prices for ODDs, thereby preventing ODD prices from declining as quickly or as far as they would have absent the defendants’ anticompetitive agreements. read more
October 21, 2014 3:18 PM | Posted by Jacob R. Hathorn and Ben V. Seessel | Permalink
In addition to the explicit Rule 23(a) requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation, an implied prerequisite to certification is that the class must be sufficiently definite: that is, the party seeking certification must demonstrate that an identifiable and ascertainable class exists. A class is ascertainable if it is defined by objective criteria and is sufficiently definite so that it is administratively feasible to determine whether a particular individual is a member of the class, which is important for purposes of being able to enforce the preclusive effect of a final judgment. read more
October 16, 2014 8:21 AM | Posted by Alina Alonso Rodriguez and Jaret J. Fuente | Permalink
The Southern District of Texas found that negligent misstatement claims filed more than two years after the last alleged misstatement were time-barred and that the applicable statute of limitations was not tolled under American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (1974). read more
October 3, 2014 9:17 AM | Posted by Christine A. Stoddard and Kristin A. Shepard | Permalink
In a recent case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, plaintiffs brought a putative class action against various defendants involved in milk production, alleging they violated the antitrust laws of fifteen states and Washington, D.C. by engaging in a conspiracy to limit the production and  increase the price of raw milk. Plaintiffs sought class certification in each of the sixteen jurisdictions; the Northern District granted the motion in all but one state, where certification failed for lack of standing. read more
October 2, 2014 4:40 PM | Posted by Oleg Rivkin and Kristin Shepard | Permalink
A New York federal district court, after holding an evidentiary hearing, certified a class for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”).  Plaintiff alleged that the defendant, a collection agency, repeatedly called his cell phone using an automated dialing system without his consent, including after being told that he was not the party defendant was trying to reach and after plaintiff had asked to be put on a “do not call” list.  Plaintiff claimed statutory damages of $500 per violation and up to $1,500 per willful violation for an alleged 146,879 unique cell phone numbers that defendant purportedly called during the class period. read more
October 1, 2014 4:48 PM | Posted by Paul G. Williams and Kristin A. Shepard | Permalink
The Eastern District of Michigan has certified a class of ERISA plan participants challenging an amendment which, in attempt to address the plan’s underfunded status, reduced their monthly disability payments.  The Court certified a class of recipients of disability retirement benefits under the plan, rejecting challenges to numerosity, adequacy, and commonality. read more
September 25, 2014 8:21 AM | Posted by Michael Greenfield and Ben Seessel | Permalink
In a 5-4 decision, the Texas Supreme Court held that the cy pres provision of a class action settlement was not subject to the state’s Unclaimed Property Act. After the trial court certified a class of subcontractors whose pay allegedly had been improperly docked by the defendant contractor, the parties settled the case on a class-wide basis agreeing that the defendant would issue refund checks to the aggrieved class members. read more
September 25, 2014 8:17 AM | Posted by Dean A. Morande and Gary M. Pappas | Permalink
A group of registered nurses formerly employed by the Department of Veterans Affairs sued the United States Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) in a putative class action seeking declaratory and injunctive relief in connection with a recalculation of their retirement annuities that OPM was obligated to perform under the retroactive application of the Veterans Affairs Health Care Programs Enhancement Act (the “Enhancement Act”). read more
September 24, 2014 9:00 AM | Posted by Jacob Hathorn and Ben Seessel | Permalink
A California federal district court recently denied a motion for class certification because the evidence presented in connection with the motion refuted plaintiffs’ attempted showing of commonality through uniform exposure to unlawful corporate policies. read more
September 23, 2014 10:38 AM | Posted by Clifton R. Gruhn and Ben V. Seessel | Permalink
Plaintiffs alleged in their putative nationwide class action complaint that Quest Diagnostics was liable for consumer fraud, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act for overbilling putative class members and, in some instances, sending them improper written demands from debt collectors. read more