September 19, 2014 3:40 PM | Posted by Jaret J. Fuente and Gary M. Pappas | Permalink
The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed certification of a class of an estimated 800 current and former California-based Allstate Insurance Company adjusters who allege that Allstate has a practice or unofficial policy of requiring its hourly claims adjusters to work unpaid off-the-clock overtime in violation of California law. read more
August 12, 2014 3:10 PM | Posted by Charles W. Throckmorton and Steven Blickensderfer | Permalink
In Local 703 v. Regions Financial Corp., No. 12:14168 (Aug. 6, 2014), the Eleventh Circuit reviewed the certification of a securities fraud class action brought by investors against Regions for allegedly misrepresenting its asset value and financial stability during the financial crisis, purportedly resulting in artificially high stock prices. read more
June 18, 2014 9:06 AM | Posted by D. Matthew Allen and Jaret J. Fuente | Permalink
Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal reversed an order certifying a class of Porsche vehicle owners who had their high intensity discharge headlights stolen during the class period. read more
May 22, 2012 5:17 PM | Posted by D. Matthew Allen | Permalink
Robert Klonoff, Dean of the Lewis & Clark Law School, an associate reporter on the American Law Institute’s Principles of the Law of Aggregate Litigation, and all-around good guy, has written a provocative article on “The Decline of Class Actions.” The article will be published in a forthcoming issue of the Washington University Law Review, but you can read it now... read more
April 10, 2012 5:58 PM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Coneff v. AT&T Corp., the Ninth Circuit again considered the implications of the recent Supreme Court case, AT&T Mobility, Inc. v. Concepcion, to determine whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempted state law in Washington. Find out what the court found, after the jump. read more
April 10, 2012 5:43 PM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Janis v. Health Net, Inc., the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether evidence that evidence of jurisdictional requirements could be considered where the evidence was not submitted at the time the notice of removal was filed.  Find out whether such evidence may be considered, after the jump.  read more
March 12, 2012 12:54 PM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Kilgore v. Keybank, National Association, ---F.3d ----, 2012 WL 718344 (9th Cir. (CA) Mar. 7, 2012), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals considered whether the Supreme Court's decision in AT&T Mobility, Inc. v. Concepcion required the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") to preempt California's state law rule prohibiting the arbitration of claims for broad, public injunctive relief in a class action related to private student loans.  Find out what controls, after the jump. read more
March 9, 2012 5:51 PM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Nevada v. Bank of America Corp., --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 688552 (9th Cir. (Nev.) Mar. 2, 2012), the Ninth Circuit was confronted with whether Nevada’s parens patriae lawsuit against Bank of America based on widespread complaints could be removed to Federal Court under the Class Action Fairness Act, including whether it could be classified as a mass action. Find out what the Ninth Circuit concluded, after the jump. read more
February 14, 2012 9:51 AM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Sam Duran et al. vs. U.S. Bank National Assn., No. A125557 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 6, 2012), the California District Court of Appeals relied on the landmark Supreme Court decision in Wal-Mart to determine whether 20 out of 260 is a sufficient sample size to support class certification. What did they conclude? Find out, after the jump. read more
February 10, 2012 10:08 AM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
In Skilstaf, Inc. v. CVS Caremark Corp., --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 400369 (C.A.9 (Cal.)), the Ninth Circuit considered an appeal from a dismissal of a putative class action filed in a California federal district court, based on a Massachusetts federal district court’s certification of a nationwide class and approval of a class settlement.  A class member who objected in the Massachusetts case filed suit in California also seeking to represent a nationwide class, seeking damages based on the same facts as the Massachusetts case but against different defendants. Did the Ninth Circuit find this to be an appropriate basis for an action? Find out, after the jump.   read more
February 10, 2012 9:39 AM | Posted by Katherine Heckert | Permalink
Three years after initial class certification, the Ninth Circuit in Mazza v. American Honda, No. 09-55376 (Jan. 12, 2012) reviewed the District Court’s opinion, considering, in part, whether the Wal-Mart affirmative burden to demonstrate that a common question of fact or law exists was met to resolve the issues “in one stroke.”  Were such common issues present in Mazza, where consumers across the country were exposed to different advertising?  Find out, after the jump. read more
January 12, 2012 5:13 PM | Posted by D. Matthew Allen | Permalink
I bet the title got your attention. My friend, Mark Hermann, the Vice President and Chief Counsel – Litigation at Aon, and author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law, has written an interesting article at In reviewing Martin Redish’s book, Wholesale Justice: Constitutional Democracy and the Problem of the Class Action Lawsuit, Mark raises two topics sure to raise hackles at the class action bar.

The first is the subject of Redish’s book, which is whether class actions are constitutional. What? I know. That’s what I thought too, at first. Here is what Mark calls a “misleadingly over-simplified” summary of Redish’s book.
read more
January 6, 2012 8:31 AM | Posted by Kathryn Christian | Permalink
Eight circuit courts of appeals rendered 19 notable decisions addressing various issues under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) in 2011, with the Seventh Circuit leading the way with five such decisions. Some show that forum shopping for class actions is alive and well. Others favor CAFA removal unless the plaintiff can show that it is “impossible” for the claim to exceed the jurisdictional amount-in-controversy threshold, while still others favored remands because removal statutes should be “strictly construed.” One decision relies upon Mark Twain for a grammar principle. There is only one dissenting opinion, but it is a very good one, citing the oft-used “duck test.” read more