Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

14 Days Or Bust: Fourth Circuit Bolsters “Rigid And Inflexible Rule” For Appealing Certification Orders

by Paul G. Williams

Artful attempts to appeal a class certification order beyond fourteen days will not impress the Fourth Circuit.  In Nucor, the district court certified two classes relating to substantive allegations of racial discrimination.  The district court then denied a motion to reconsider, triggering the fourteen day period for filing an interlocutory appeal.  Defendants, however, subsequently filed three motions for decertification, and one of them succeeded in part: it decertified one of the classes in light of Wal-Mart v. Dukes and left the other class intact.  Defendants then filed a fourth motion to decertify the remaining class based on Comcast v. Behrend.  The district court denied that motion, and defendants filed a petition for interlocutory appeal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f).

Reiterating that the fourteen day deadline was “rigid and inflexible,” the Fourth Circuit found that the fourteen day period was not reset by the appealed order – whether styled as one for reconsideration or decertification.  Because the order did not alter the status of the class over which defendants filed their appeal, it was not an order granting or denying certification as to that class.

Nucor Corp. v. Brown, No. 14-154 (4th Cir. July 25, 2014).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

Parens Patriae Action By State Attorney General Is Not Removable Under CAFA’s Class Action Provision

Next Article »

Ninth Circuit Finds Self-Identification By Class Members Does Not Satisfy Ascertainability Under Rule 23

About Paul G. Williams

Related Articles

  1. GCs facing more bet-the-company and higher exposure class actions
  2. 2016 Carlton Fields Class Action Survey Reveals Important Trends in Class Action Management
  3. The Third Circuit Joins The Sixth And Holds That The Availability Of Class Arbitration Is A Substantive Question Of Arbitrability For Courts To Decide, Absent Clear Agreement Otherwise

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

2025 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • Supreme Court Refuses to Decide Whether Damages Class Containing Both Injured and Uninjured Members Can Be Certified
  • Royal Canin v. Wullschleger: A Primer on Jurisdiction
  • Classified (Bi-)Monthly: A Roundup of Class Action Decisions From Federal Appellate Courts July and August 2024

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified®: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Copyright © 2025 · Carlton Fields · All Rights Reserved