The Ninth Circuit affirmed certification of putative class actions brought against ConAgra Foods, Inc. (“ConAgra”) by consumers who claimed that ConAgra’s “100% Natural” labels on Wesson cooking oils were false or misleading. The plaintiffs argued that the oils are “not natural” because they are made from bioengineered ingredients, and moved to certify eleven statewide classes of consumers who purchased the oils within the applicable statute of limitations periods. ... Keep Reading »
Search Results for: rule 23
State Law Prohibiting Class Actions Does Not Preclude Court From Maintaining Certification and Approving Settlement Agreement
The Sixth Circuit recently affirmed approval of a class action settlement agreement, holding that “a post-settlement change in the law does not alter the binding nature of the parties' settlement agreement, nor does it violate Rule 23 . . . or the Rules Enabling Act.” The plaintiffs brought a class action against their former employers, alleging violations of the Kentucky Wage and Hour Act (KWHA). After the district court certified a class, the parties reached a ... Keep Reading »
Third Circuit Creates Framework for Analyzing Numerosity
The Third Circuit recently vacated class certification, granted by the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after nearly a decade of litigation, in an antitrust case alleging that a pharmaceutical company entered into agreements with four generic drug makers that, acting together, delayed the sale of generic drugs and prevented the creation of a competitive market. In the second part of its panel opinion regarding predominance under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), ... Keep Reading »
Nothing Shady Where State Statutory Language Restricting Class Actions is Clear
Six years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court stated in a plurality opinion that "Rule 23 unambiguously authorizes any plaintiff, in any federal proceeding, to maintain a class action if the Rule's requirements are met" -- even if the same case could not be brought as a class action under state law. Shady Grove Orthopedic Accos., P.A. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 559 U.S. 393, 406 (2010). While the Shady Grove ruling may seem clear when the conflicting state law is purely procedural, ... Keep Reading »
No Repose for Debate on Applicability of American Pipe Tolling
In its seminal 1974 American Pipe opinion, the Supreme Court held that the commencement of a class action tolls the applicable statutes of limitation as to all putative class members who would have been parties had the class been certified. Since then, courts have repeatedly applied American Pipe to toll statutes of limitation but disagreed as to whether the doctrine is based on legal principals under Rule 23 or the equitable power of the courts. The Eleventh Circuit ... Keep Reading »
Third Circuit Rejects Inflated-Value Theory of Damages, Declines to Certify Law School Tuition Class
The Third Circuit recently affirmed the denial of class certification in a suit alleging that a law school made misrepresentations about the employment status of its graduates, thereby inducing students to pay inflated tuition in violation of the New Jersey and Delaware consumer fraud statutes. Much of the decision centered on damages; plaintiffs claimed they could show damages on a class-wide basis by estimating the amount by which tuition was inflated due to the ... Keep Reading »
“Placeholder” Motions to Certify are Unnecessary after Campbell-Ewald According to South Carolina District Court
Relying on the Supreme Court’s 2016 opinion in Campbell-Ewald, the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina ruled that a class action plaintiff need not file a “placeholder” motion to certify to avoid a defendant’s attempt to “pick-off” the plaintiff and moot the class with a Rule 68 Offer of Judgment (OJ). Plaintiff filed its putative class action complaint alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Practices Act and immediately sought ... Keep Reading »
Declined: Second Circuit Panel Shreds Visa and MasterCard Antitrust Settlement
A Second Circuit panel rejected the settlement reached between defendants Visa, MasterCard, and various banks, and plaintiffs, approximately 12 million merchants who alleged the principally identical network rules of Visa and MasterCard were anti-competitive in contravention of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The Second Circuit held that class plaintiffs were inadequately represented in violation of Rule 23(a)(4) and the Due Process Clause. After nearly 10 years of ... Keep Reading »
Court Orders Additional Notice to Class Regarding Counsel’s Request for Fees Based on Work Performed Following Initial Fee Award
The Northern District of Illinois vacated its grant of fees to class counsel for work performed following an initial fee award, finding that Rule 23(h) required notice to the class regarding counsel’s new fee request, even though the total attorneys’ fees awarded were within the range disclosed in the original class notice. As discussed in a prior post, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the initial award of fees to class counsel, notwithstanding that the settlement included a ... Keep Reading »
Southern District of California Rejects Coupon Class Settlement
Jaret J. Fuente and D. Matthew Allen The Southern District of California rejected a pre-certification class settlement because it provided for an inadequate coupon payment and a tenuous cy pres award, and included a clear sailing attorney fee provision. Plaintiff Hofman alleged that Dutch, LLC sells jeans labeled “Made in the USA” that contain foreign-made components (buttons, rivets, zippers, etc.) in violation of the California Business and Professional Code and the ... Keep Reading »
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- …
- 22
- Next Page »