In a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) case, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio struck plaintiff’s class action allegations because Plaintiff proposed a “fail-safe” class in which membership was dependent on the validity of the putative class member’s claim. A fail-safe class is impermissible because it includes only those who are entitled to relief. Either the class members win on the merits, or by virtue of losing, they are not in ... Keep Reading »
Court Strikes Class Allegations Against Lender and Foreclosure Service Providers for Failure to Satisfy Rule 23(a)(2)’s Commonality Requirement
The Northern District of Illinois recently granted a motion to strike class allegations prior to class discovery. Plaintiff mortgagor alleged, inter alia, that in foreclosure proceedings, defendants engaged in unfair and deceptive business practices in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (“ICFA”) by entering and possessing his and putative class members’ homes before the mortgagee had legal possession of the ... Keep Reading »
District Court Applies Gulf Oil to Restrict Issuance of Arbitration Agreements to Prospective Class Members
Drivers brought a putative class action suit against Uber Technologies (“Uber”), the licensor of a software application used to connect drivers for hire with passengers, alleging that Uber failed to remit to drivers the full amount of gratuities paid by passengers. The court’s recent decision involved a licensing agreement that, in the wake of pending class actions, was given to prospective drivers who downloaded the app and required that all disputes be resolved ... Keep Reading »
Court Strikes Class Action Allegations Citing Individualized Causation Issues
A Pennsylvania federal district court granted defendant CitiMortgage’s motion to strike class allegations under Rule 23(d)(1)(D), because it was clear from the complaint that plaintiffs could not meet the requirements for maintaining a class action and were unlikely to be able to substantiate their class allegations through discovery. Plaintiffs were homeowners who, after defaulting on their mortgage, commenced a class action against three defendants related to the ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Finds Plaintiff’s Proposed Damages Models Insufficient Under Comcast; Denies Certification Under Rule 23(b)(3) But Certifies 23(b)(2) Class
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 »
Ninth Circuit Holds On 23(f) Appeal That District Court Abused Its Discretion By Weighing The Merits In Denying Certification
After granting the plaintiffs’ Rule 23(f) petition, the Ninth Circuit reversed a denial of class certification, finding that the district court had improperly weighed the merits of the plaintiffs’ Rule 23(a)(2) commonality evidence. The plaintiffs’ complaint alleged that the defendant’s criteria for promoting police officers to investigative positions created a disparate impact on those candidates over the age of 40, which violated California’s Fair Employment and ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Invalidates Opt-Outs And Orders Employer To Issue A Curative Notice To Employees Regarding A Putative Wage And Hour Class Action
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, in a wage and hour class action, found that the employer’s written communication to putative class member employees about the action, which included an opt-out declaration form, was “problematic” and “one-sided.” The court invalidated signed opt-outs, and ordered the employer to send a “curative notice” to the employees. The employer, a dental practice, described itself as a close-knit group of ... Keep Reading »
Court Rejects Two Common Methods of Proving Reliance on Class-wide Basis
Plaintiffs in a securities fraud class action containing over 2,000 individual investors were unable to convince a New York District Court that the reliance element of their claims was susceptible to a common method of proof for all putative class members thereby precluding certification under Rule 23(b)(3). Plaintiffs alleged that defendants misrepresented the involvement a certain individual, known for his investment expertise, would have in the management of their ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Finds Commonality Lacking Under Dukes Analysis; Denies Certification
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California denied certification in a false advertising case brought under California’s False Advertising Law (FAL), Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) and the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) because the plaintiff failed to satisfy Rule 23(a)’s commonality requirement. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant developed, encouraged, and promoted three Unlimited Download Websites that offered media titles for a one-time ... Keep Reading »
Courts Find Removal Is Not Permitted Under CAFA Where Plaintiff Did Not Plead A Class Action Under Rule 23 Or Comparable State Rule
District Courts continue to shape the boundaries of CAFA jurisdiction in suits that are not pleaded as class actions. For example, the District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana held that defendants could not rely on the “real party in interest” inquiry articulated in the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., 134 S.Ct. 736 (2014) to create a class action where the State did not plead one. The case arose from ... Keep Reading »