Yet another court has found that an unaccepted Rule 68 Offer of Judgment will not moot a putative class action, even where the offer purports to satisfy all of plaintiff’s demands. Plaintiffs sued in the Eastern District of Missouri and proposed to represent a class of at least 60 former joint venture general managers of Panera Bread Company whose buyout payments from Panera were allegedly capped at an amount lower than that to which they contractually agreed. Plaintiffs ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Holds Class Action Alleging Securities Act Claims Not Removable Under SLUSA
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently clarified the criteria for removal of a securities class action filed in state court under the Securities Act of 1933, 15 U.S.C. §§ 77a, et seq. (the “Securities Act”). Under the Securities Act’s anti-removal provision, state and federal courts generally have concurrent jurisdiction over Securities Act claims, but a Securities Act claim initially filed in state court cannot be removed to ... Keep Reading »
Northern District of Texas Won’t Certify Class of GM Employees Alleging Religious Accommodation Claims
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas refused certify a class of GM employees alleging Title VII religious accommodation claims because the class was not ascertainable and plaintiffs failed to satisfy the numerosity and commonality requirements of Rule 23(a). Plaintiffs are members of different religious groups that observe certain holy days on which members are prevented from working and accepting compensation. They alleged that GM failed to ... Keep Reading »
No Cash Compensation for Class of Amateur Student Athletes
In a class action brought under the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the NCAA eligibility regulations are subject to antitrust scrutiny. Applying the so-called Rule of Reason, the court held that the longstanding NCAA rule that prohibits colleges from providing the cost of attendance to athletes is “more restrictive than necessary to maintain [the] tradition of amateurism” and therefore violates the Antitrust Act. However, reversing the ... 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 »
CFPB Proposes Banning Use of Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements in Consumer Class Actions
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced today that it is considering rules prohibiting application of pre-dispute arbitration agreements to class litigation involving certain consumer financial products. Citing concerns that such agreements "effectively prohibit" class litigation and prevent consumers from obtaining remedies for harm caused by providers of consumer financial products or services, the proposal would apply to most products ... Keep Reading »
Class Action Articles in Expect Focus (Vol. III, Summer 2015)
Phantom Injury Dooms “Shadow Insurance” Case A recent federal district court decision dismissing a putative class action complaint against AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company may portend trouble for plaintiffs pursuing a number of similar so-called "shadow insurance" cases against New York insurers based on allegedly sham reinsurance transactions with affiliated (or "captive") reinsurers. Continue reading » Insurer Victory in IUL Class Action In a highly-anticipated ... Keep Reading »
Ninth Circuit Holds District Court Erred In Denying Certification To Class Of Google Advertisers
A Ninth Circuit panel reversed a district court’s order denying certification of a putative nationwide class of internet advertisers, holding that the district court erred in finding that plaintiff failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement. Plaintiff’s class action complaint alleged that Google violated California’s Unfair Competition Law and Fair Advertising Law by failing to disclose that some of Google’s AdWords ads would appear on parked domains and ... Keep Reading »
California Employment Law and Arbitration: The Battle Intensifies
Yesterday, by a two-to-one vote, the Ninth Circuit joined the California Supreme Court in holding that Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) claims are an exception to the Federal Arbitration Act. In Sakkab v. Luxottica Retail North America, Inc., Ninth Circuit Case No. 13-55184, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit held that PAGA claims could not be waived or sent to mandatory individual arbitration, which is consistent with the California Supreme Court’s decision in ... Keep Reading »
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- …
- 49
- Next Page »