Following the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540, 1549 (2016) – which held that Article III standing requires a concrete injury, even when an injury has otherwise been established for statutory purposes – there has been a debate as to what constitutes Article III “concrete injury” under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227. With certain exceptions, the TCPA creates a statutory cause of ... Keep Reading »
The Amount-in-Controversy Requirement Presents an “Obstacle” to CAFA Removal
In Pazol v. Tough Mudder Inc., No. 15-1640, --- F.3d ----, 2016 WL 1638045 (1st Cir. Apr. 26, 2016), the First Circuit analyzed the “reasonable probability” standard that a defendant must satisfy to support CAFA’s $5 million amount-in-controversy removal requirement. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2). The putative class action began in Massachusetts state court and stemmed from a decision by the defendant, a promoter of a series of nationwide “obstacle course” races, to move ... Keep Reading »
SCOTUS Denies Review Regarding Pennsylvania Wal-Mart “Rest Break” Class Judgment
On April 4, the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari review of a $188 million class-action judgment returned against Wal-Mart in Pennsylvania state court and later upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court regarding claimed “rest break” and “meal break” violations. Only six plaintiffs testified on behalf of the class, and the plaintiffs’ experts used extrapolated evidence to calculate the total damages sustained (rather than actually determining the total damages ... Keep Reading »
A Tale of Two Orders: Different Results for Motions to Strike Class Allegations
The Southern District of California and the Northern District of Illinois recently entered orders addressing motions to strike class allegations—with very different results for the respective defendants. Although the claims and facts at issue in each case may warrant the different results, a contrast in approaches is evident. In Kim v. Shellpoint Partners, LLC, No. 15CV611-LAB (BLM), 2016 WL 1241541 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 30, 2016), the Southern District of California ... Keep Reading »
For Want of a Damages Model, Certification Was Lost
Khasin v. R. C. Bigelow, Inc., No. 12-CV-02204-WHO, 2016 WL 1213767 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 29, 2016), provides a recent example of a class-certification denial premised on the “damages model” rule expressed in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S.Ct. 1426, 1433 (2013). As the Northern District of California expressed it: “To satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement, a plaintiff must demonstrate that ‘damages are capable of measurement on a classwide basis….’ At class ... Keep Reading »
Fifth Circuit Holds Unaccepted Rule 68 Offer of Judgment Cannot Moot a Named Plaintiff’s Claim in a Putative Class Action
The defendant in a putative class action brought pursuant to the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA), 15 U.S.C. § 1693, et seq., tendered a Rule 68 offer of judgment to the named plaintiff before class certification briefing occurred. The defendant proposed to settle with the named plaintiff for the maximum allowable statutory damages for his individual claim, and to pay costs accrued and reasonable and necessary attorney fees, through the date of acceptance of the ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Finds CAFA’s Amount-in-Controversy Requirement Satisfied and No Local Controversy Alleged; Denies Motion to Remand
The Southern District of California denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand a putative class action removed pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), where the plaintiff had alleged that the primary defendant’s product, Chobani yogurt, had become “the best-selling brand of Greek yogurt in the United States”; had annual revenues estimated at $1 billion in 2012; and had “collected tens of millions of dollars” in California alone (as the result of allegedly deceptive ... Keep Reading »
Western District of Missouri Declines to Deliver Certification in Class Action Based on Alleged Newspaper Subscription Overcharges
The Western District of Missouri denied class certification in an action alleging three regional newspapers—the Kansas City Star, the Fort Worth Star Telegram, and the Belleville News-Democrat—unlawfully double billed some of their subscribers by shortening the length of their subscriptions. The named plaintiffs, subscribers to the Kansas City Star only, alleged that without providing proper notice, the newspapers deducted additional charges for special or premium ... Keep Reading »
Eighth Circuit Affirms Denial of “Predominance” Class: The Long Arm of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act Does Not Reach Wholly Out-of-State Conduct
In 2012, California resident Ronald Perras brought suit in federal district court against H&R Block and its affiliates (H&R), which are headquartered in Kansas City, Missouri. Perras alleged that H&R violated the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) by charging its customers compliance fees in excess of H&R’s actual cost of complying with new federal regulations. Perras sought to define a class of all persons in all states except Missouri who had ... Keep Reading »
Avon Calling: Employees Allege Overtime Exemption Misclassification
Avon categorizes all of its district service managers (DSMs) under the "administrative" exception of California law that requires employers to pay overtime wages. DSMs are the Avon employees who recruit and train the independent retail contractors Avon uses to sell its products to the consuming public. Plaintiffs – 19 former or current Avon DSMs – claimed Avon improperly treated them as exempt and sought to represent a Rule 23(b)(3) class. Relying on the California ... Keep Reading »