The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a district court order denying certification to a group of homeowners in four states who alleged roof shingle manufacturer Owens Corning sold defective roof shingles and misrepresented their expected useful life. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged claims for breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and violation of various state consumer protection statutes because the shingles installed ... Keep Reading »
Predominance Class Action Articles
The latest class action developments and trends in predominance, including news, key cases, and strategies.
Careful What You Wish For – Additional Discovery Requested by TCPA Class Plaintiff Leads to Decertification Order in Northern District of Illinois
Federal courts have a continuing obligation to ensure that class action certification remains appropriate throughout the duration of a case. Accordingly, it is well established that if class certification is later deemed improvident, the district court may decertify a previously certified class. That is precisely what the Northern District of Illinois did in Johnson v. YAHOO! Inc., No. 14 CV 2028, 2018 WL 835339 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 13, 2018), in addressing a previously ... Keep Reading »
Third Circuit Ascertainability Requirement Puts the Squeeze on Orange Juice Purchasers
A New Jersey district court denied certification to a putative class of Tropicana orange juice purchasers from “Members Only” or “Loyalty Card” stores in California, New York, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. The plaintiffs alleged various common law and statutory consumer protection causes of action based on Tropicana’s alleged false marketing of its orange juice as “all natural.” The court found that the plaintiffs satisfied the four certification requirements of Rule 23(a) ... Keep Reading »
Too Fast and Furious: Ninth Circuit Unwinds Hyundai and Kia Nationwide Class Action Settlement
In a split panel, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court’s certification of a nationwide class action settlement because the lower court failed to conduct a sufficient predominance inquiry under Rule 23(b)(3). In 2012 Hyundai and Kia were accused of overstating their fuel efficiency estimates in advertisements and car window stickers for certain of their vehicles. A flurry of putative class action litigation ensued across the country, and the MDL ... Keep Reading »
Second Circuit Reiterates: Defendants Must Satisfy Burden of Persuasion Through a Preponderance of the Evidence to Rebut Basic Presumption in Securities Fraud Class Actions
The Second Circuit, in keeping with its recent decision in Waggoner v. Barclays, reaffirmed that defendants must satisfy the burden of persuasion by a preponderance of the evidence to rebut the presumption established by the Supreme Court in Basic, Inc. v. Levinson. The plaintiffs-appellees, who had acquired shares of Goldman Sachs stock between 2007 and 2010, claimed violations of section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b–5, based on Goldman’s alleged ... Keep Reading »
SeaWorld Shareholders See Red After World Sees Blackfish
A California District Court granted certification to a group of SeaWorld investors in a shareholder securities fraud case following the release of the documentary “Blackfish.” First released in July 2013, “Blackfish” chronicles the cruelty of killer whale capture methods, the danger posed by killer whales to trainers, and the physical and psychological strains killer whales experience in captivity. The movie resulted in significant negative publicity for SeaWorld and ... Keep Reading »
Charges by Law Firm-Owned Vendors Challenged in Putative Client Class
Plaintiffs signed engagement letters with the law firm Finkelstein & Partners (the “law firm”) to represent them in two separate personal injury lawsuits on a contingency basis. The contract specifically identified several litigation support vendors who may perform work on the cases, including service of subpoenas, writing client biographies, investigations, photo and video gathering, locating expert witnesses, research, conducting focus groups, and creating trial ... Keep Reading »
Individualized Inquiries and Difficulties Identifying Class Members Doom Title Insurance Reissue Rate Class Action
The District Court of Idaho recently decertified a title insurance reissue rate class action, finding the initial justifications for class certification have “not withstood the test of time.” Under the Idaho Rate Manual, customers are entitled to a 50 percent discount when a title policy is issued within two years of a previous policy on the same property by the same owner. Seven years ago, the court granted class certification for a class of Idaho residential customers ... Keep Reading »
Objectively Non-Flushable? The Northern District of California Certifies Consumer Class Regarding Charmin Freshmates
Using the familiar “reasonable consumer standard” that applies in many jurisdictions regarding allegedly deceptive sales practices, a judge of the Northern District of California recently certified a class action of California consumers who purchased Charmin/Proctor & Gamble’s “Freshmates” brand of “flushable” bathroom wet-wipes between April 6, 2011, and August 3, 2017. The class claims centered on the allegation that Freshmates were not “flushable” as advertised ... Keep Reading »
A Damages Class Is Certified, but No Standing for Declaratory and Injunctive Class
A representative plaintiff who purchased Aveeno sunscreen products and baby bath products brought putative class actions against the products’ manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, in the United State District Court for the District of Connecticut. Both of plaintiff’s asserted classes challenged Aveeno’s product labeling under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) and the similar consumer protection laws of several other states and the District of ... Keep Reading »
- « Previous Page
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- …
- 8
- Next Page »