The Central District of California denied certification of a class that otherwise met the requirements of Rule 23 because the damages model proposed by plaintiff’s expert did not establish a reliable method for calculating classwide damages. Plaintiff sought to certify a class of purchasers of Fuhu’s “Nabi” line of rechargeable tablets for children. Plaintiff claimed that the tablets’ charging capabilities were defective and that Fuhu misrepresented the tablets’ ... Keep Reading »
Manufacturing & Products Class Action Articles
The latest class action developments and trends in the manfucturing and products industry, including news, key cases, and strategies.
California Supreme Court Endorses More Consumer Class False Advertising Litigation in Organic Food Decision
“Labels matter,” the California Supreme Court began its unanimous December 3 opinion. Expect that to be the new rallying cry of plaintiff class action lawyers when suing consumer companies for alleged false advertising. The California Supreme Court held that state law claims of intentional mislabeling produce as organic are not preempted by the Organic Food Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. §§ 6501-6522). Whether this ruling will be limited to just that federal act or will have ... Keep Reading »
Defects More Than Cosmetic: Beauty Product Purchasers Fail to Satisfy Rule 23
The Southern District of New York recently denied class certification in a consolidated putative class action against a cosmetics company for breach of contract, false advertising, unfair competition, deceptive acts and practices, and other violations of state law. Plaintiffs alleged the company made false claims regarding its anti-aging products and sought to certify multiple classes of purchases, nationwide and in two states, with additional subclasses based on whether ... Keep Reading »
How to Handle Claims Brought by a Class Representative Under Laws of a Different State: Lessons from the Northern District of California
Arroyo v. TP-Link USA Corporation (N.D. Cal.) presents a varied opinion on the viability of class claims under California law, particularly as brought by a non-California class representative. Plaintiff, a Florida resident, alleged that defendants made false and misleading statements about the speed and capabilities of their network adapters. Plaintiff brought claims on behalf of a putative class under California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 1750 et ... Keep Reading »
Eleventh Circuit Denies Petition For Rehearing In Lisk v. Lumber One
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals denied a petition for rehearing en banc in the Lisk v. Lumber One Wood Preserving, LLC matter, where last month it held that the Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act’s restriction on private class actions does not apply in federal court; rather, federal rule 23 controls. See our prior post about that opinion. Lisk v. Lumber One Wood Preserving, LLC., No. 14-11714 (11th Cir. September 15, 2015). ... 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 »
Rice Capades: Court Certifies a Class of Lead Lawyers Against Defendant Law Firms Who Allegedly Used the Class’s Work Product in Rice Litigation
The Eastern District of Missouri certified an unusual class of lawyers and their clients who undertook a collective effort to litigate claims against Bayer related to the purported “contamination” of the U.S. rice supply by Bayer’s genetically modified rice. The defendants are law firms that allegedly benefitted from the work performed by the class in state and federal cases against Bayer. Bayer’s introduction of genetically modified rice into the U.S. domestic rice ... Keep Reading »
Eleventh Circuit Holds Rule 23 Trumps State Law Precluding Private Class Actions
The Alabama Deceptive Trade Practices Act’s (ADTPA) restriction on private class actions does not apply in federal court. Federal Rule 23 controls. That’s what the Eleventh Circuit recently held, relying on Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co., 559 U.S. 393, 130 S. Ct. 1431, 176 L.Ed.2d 311 (2010). Plaintiff contracted for installation of a wood fence. The manufacturer warranted that the wood was treated and would remain free from rot, ... Keep Reading »
“Game Over”: Aliens vs. Consumer Class Action
Two video game enthusiasts brought a consumer class action suit against Sega of America, Inc. ("Sega") and Gearbox Software, LLC ("Gearbox") for their alleged disappointment in the quality of the video game "Aliens: Colonial Marines"("ACM"). ACM was marketed as "the canon sequel" to the film Aliens, the 1986 classic blockbuster in which Bill Paxton's character famously exclaimed "Game over, man, now what are we supposed to do?" after the dropship meant to rescue the ... 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 »