As a recent Ninth Circuit decision demonstrates, although substantial time, effort, and briefing may be spent litigating issues in a removed federal putative class action, parties should be prepared for a round two of their persuasion attempts in state court where the case is remanded to state court. In Echevarria v. Aerotek, Inc., a California district court remanded a representative action filed under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) after finding ... Keep Reading »
Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) Articles
The latest CAFA developments and trends, including news, key cases, and strategies.
CAFA: Ninth Circuit Affirms District Court’s Sua Sponte Invocation and Application of Discretionary Home State Exception
On May 13, 2020, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the remand of a wage and hour class action lawsuit filed in California state court based on the home state exception to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In its opinion affirming the remand, the Ninth Circuit explored both parts of the home state exception. Defendant West Marine removed the lawsuit to federal court under CAFA. There was no dispute that West Marine’s CAFA removal satisfied the statutory ... Keep Reading »
Eleventh Circuit Takes Life Insurance Reinstatement Claims at Face Value for CAFA Amount-In-Controversy Purposes
The Eleventh Circuit recently examined the application of the $5 million amount-in-controversy requirement under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) to disputes over life insurance premiums and policies. It concluded that the face value of a surrendered or lapsed life insurance policy constitutes the amount placed in controversy when the plaintiff requests reinstatement of the policy as equitable relief for asserted claims. In Anderson v. Wilco Life Insurance Co., ... Keep Reading »
A Dart Across the Bow
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently underscored that removal practice under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) differs in some important respects from traditional removal practice in non-CAFA cases. It did so because, “[i]n some of our early cases interpreting CAFA, we adopted legal standards that were influenced by a general ‘presumption against federal jurisdiction.’” Now, of course, the Supreme Court in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, 574 U.S. 81 ... Keep Reading »
Seventh Circuit Snapshots Hole in Groupon’s Notice of Removal of Instagram User Suit
The Seventh Circuit remanded an Instagram user's appeal after the court found that Groupon's notice of removal did not allege the citizenship of any diverse member of the putative class. The decision highlights the importance of actually alleging the minimal diversity requirement for removal under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). The plaintiff, Christine Dancel, obtained permission under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) to appeal the lower court's denial of ... Keep Reading »
Life May Not Be Fair, But Arizona Cannot Find Out Without Standing
The Sixth Circuit recently held that Arizona lacked standing to intervene in, and object to, a nationwide class settlement at the settlement fairness hearing. The underlying case involved Tristar Products' defective pressure cookers. The district court had certified three state classes for trial - Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Colorado - but after the first day of trial, the parties entered into a nationwide class settlement. The settlement allowed class members to receive a ... Keep Reading »
Report on Current Class Action Issues Plaguing Life Insurers
As Justice Hugo Black said in 1944, “Perhaps no modern commercial enterprise directly affects so many persons in all walks of life as does the insurance business.” Even so, the evolving threat of class action lawsuits brings heightened concerns for the life insurance industry. And as shown by the prevalence of life insurance class actions over the past years, class actions against life insurers come in all shapes and sizes. In “Class Action Roundup,” Carlton Fields ... Keep Reading »
Supreme Court Declines to Remove Loophole in CAFA
On May 28, 2019, Justice Clarence Thomas — joined by unlikely allies Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan — wrote the 5-4 majority opinion holding that third-party counterclaim defendants in class actions do not have the authority to remove claims to federal court under either the general removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), or § 1453(b) of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In this pro-consumer ruling, Justice Thomas declined to close an emerging ... Keep Reading »
If at First You Don’t Succeed, Try Another CAFA Exception
A Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Panel recently affirmed a district court order remanding a putative class action to state court after the defendants' initial removal under CAFA. The case involved claims on behalf of users of the Golden Gate Bridge against three defendants for violations of California's privacy statutes concerning the collection and sharing of personally identifiable information. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that after collecting information of ... Keep Reading »
Don’t Count Your Chickens – Or State Citizens for CAFA Exceptions – Before They Hatch
The Ninth Circuit vacated a remand order implicating the local and home-state controversy exceptions to CAFA jurisdiction in a putative class action by former California resident employees of Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) for state wage-and-hour law violations. The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not meet their burden to prove that “greater than two-thirds of proposed class members” were residents of California to invoke the exceptions. Originally filed in ... Keep Reading »
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 6
- Next Page »