Following Hurricane Katrina, the State of Louisiana filed a class action to recover under homeowners’ insurance policies that the state had received by assignment through a disaster relief program. The insurers successfully removed to federal court based on CAFA jurisdiction, and challenged the assignability of the homeowners’ contractual rights. Finding that Louisiana law required a policy by policy examination of each anti-assignment clause, the district court ... Keep Reading »
California District Court Holds That Named Plaintiff’s Lack Of Credibility On Key Issue Renders Him An Inadequate Class Representative; Denies Certification
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 »
Knowles Gives Employer Second Chance To Seek And Win Removal
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that neither a damages waiver nor the passage of more than 30 days after receipt of a complaint prevented an employer’s removal under CAFA. A putative class of California store managers suing for lost overtime successfully prevented the defendant-employer’s first attempt at removal by expressly disclaiming any right to recover damages over $4,999,999.99, thereby ensuring that CAFA’s $5 million amount in controversy requirement ... Keep Reading »
Putative Class Members Cannot Establish Damages in Dietary Supplement Case
In Moore v. GNC Holdings, Inc., Southern District of Florida Judge Dimetrouleas ordered partial summary judgment in favor of GNC and against the class as to plaintiffs’ damages claims under Florida’s Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA). While this order does not dispense with all of the claims, it does eliminate any potential monetary award to the class, and limits plaintiffs to injunctive relief. More specifically, despite the court’s finding that ... Keep Reading »
Putative Nationwide Class Of Car Dealers Turns Out To Be A Lemon – Individualized Issues Preclude Certification
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 »
The Eleventh Circuit Declares that CAFA’s Amount-in-Controversy Requirement Can Be Satisfied In Declaratory Relief Cases
On February 14, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Class Action Fairness Act’s (CAFA) $5,000,000 amount-in-controversy requirement can be satisfied where the plaintiff seeks only declaratory relief. S. Fla. Wellness, Inc. v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 14-10001, --- F.3d ---, 2014 WL 576111 (11th Cir. Feb. 14, 2014). A dispute arose when South Florida Wellness, a Florida-based healthcare provider, sought payment from Allstate for its treatment of an ... Keep Reading »
Monitor what? Another medical monitoring development in the Spray Polyurethane Foam Insulation Products Liability Litigation
On January 31, 2014, the Middle District of Florida dismissed, without prejudice, a medical monitoring claim in a spray polyurethane foam (SPF) insulation products liability class action. Gibson v. LaPolla Indus., Inc., et al., No. 6:13-cv-646-Orl-36KRS (Dkt. 48). The court held that the plaintiffs did not “specify any single serious condition or even reasonably specific group of serious conditions that they are at a significantly increased risk of contracting as a ... Keep Reading »
SCOTUS Defines “Mass Action”
On January 14, 2013, the United States Supreme Court decided Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics Corp., --- U.S. ---, No. 12-1036. The question presented in that case was whether a suit filed by a state as the sole plaintiff constituted a “mass action” under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 where it included a claim for restitution based on injuries suffered by the state’s citizens. Holding it did not, the Court determined that a “mass action” must involve ... Keep Reading »
No Nationwide Standing for Florida-Based Spray Polyurethane Foam Insulation Litigation Class Representative
On December 9, 2013, the Southern District of Florida in Renzi v. Demilec (USA) LLC, et al., No. 9:12-cv-80516-KAM, granted Spray Polyurethane Foam “(SPF”) insulation manufacturer Demilec’s motion for partial summary judgment on class representative Renzi's claim for "violation of consumer protection acts." See Renzi (Dkt. 113). Renzi sought relief on behalf of a nationwide class under not only the consumer protection act of Florida, her state of residence, but also ... Keep Reading »
No MDL for SPF, Says the JPML…
On May 30, 2013, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation ("JPML") heard argument on Florida Spray Polyurethane Foam (“SPF”) Insulation plaintiff Lucille Renzi's motion to transfer all of the SPF insulation product liability lawsuits to the Southern District of Florida, where her lawsuit was pending, for coordinated and consolidated pre-trial proceedings. Renzi asserted that multiple other "substantially similar putative class action[s] involving the same ... Keep Reading »