The Southern District of Texas recently denied certification of a subclass of BP shareholders who purchased shares prior to the Deepwater Horizon explosion and alleged that misstatements regarding safety improvements caused them to buy BP shares at inflated prices. The court, however, certified a subclass of shareholders who purchased shares after the disaster and alleged that BP’s misstatements regarding the scope of the damage from the explosion and oil spill ... Keep Reading »
Predominance Class Action Articles
The latest class action developments and trends in predominance, including news, key cases, and strategies.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California certified a Rule 23(b)(2) class for injunctive and declaratory relief but denied plaintiff’s motion for class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) because plaintiff failed to present a sufficient damages model as required byComcast v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426, 1430 (2013). Plaintiff’s putative class action complaint alleged that product labels on 51 varieties of Twinings tea, and statements contained on the ... Keep Reading »
Google recently scored a big victory in its battle against claims that it is illegally intercepting and scanning the content of emails in order to provide personalized advertisements to Gmail users. Plaintiffs in the various lawsuits – which were consolidated for pretrial purposes in the Northern District of California – sought certification of classes including “education” users, who use Gmail provided by their school, as well as other direct and indirect users ... Keep Reading »
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied class certification in a product mislabeling case after holding that named plaintiff lacked credibility on a material issue and, therefore, could not be an adequate class representative under Rule 23(a)(4). Plaintiff’s putative class action complaint alleged that manufacturer Boiron violated, among other laws, the California Unfair Competition Law and the Consumers Legal Remedies Act by misrepresenting ... Keep Reading »
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia denied plaintiffs’ motion for nationwide class certification because the proposed class did not meet Rule 23’s commonality or predominance requirements. The putative class plaintiffs had entered into agreements granting them rights to distribute the defendant’s cars in the United States. The plaintiffs had paid the defendant’s “application” fees and, in some instances, prepared dealerships to receive new ... Keep Reading »