Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Class Action Standing Articles

The latest class action standing developments and trends, including news, key cases, and strategies.

Ninth Circuit Says Plaintiff Might Get Fooled Again

October 25, 2017 by Mark A. Neubauer

Last week the Ninth Circuit reopened a key avenue in consumer false advertising class actions – injunctive relief. A growing number of trial courts had dismissed those claims, reasoning that plaintiffs who know of the alleged fraud aren’t at risk of being fooled again. No more. In Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation, the Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff who alleges that so-called “flushable wipes” are not actually flushable has standing to sue the seller of these ... Keep Reading »

The Continuing Saga of Standing in Data Breach Class Actions: The 8th Circuit Weighs In

September 28, 2017 by Carlton Fields

We previously reported on the developing circuit split over Article III standing in data breach class action cases. In August, the D.C. Circuit Court joined the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in finding that the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing can be satisfied by fear of identity theft following a data breach. Now, the Eighth Circuit has weighed in with two new decisions that evidence a narrower, more nuanced approach to the standing issue. In ... Keep Reading »

Still Standing: Ninth Circuit Again Finds Standing in Spokeo Remand

August 30, 2017 by Carlton Fields

The Ninth Circuit recently issued its latest opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the closely-watched putative class action dating back to 2010. The plaintiff initiated the lawsuit against Spokeo, which aggregates publicly available data about individuals on its website, alleging the company published inaccurate information about him, including his age, wealth, marital status, educational history, and profession. He claimed that this conduct violated the Fair Credit ... Keep Reading »

Objectively Non-Flushable? The Northern District of California Certifies Consumer Class Regarding Charmin Freshmates

August 22, 2017 by D. Matthew Allen and David L. Luck

Using the familiar “reasonable consumer standard” that applies in many jurisdictions regarding allegedly deceptive sales practices, a judge of the Northern District of California recently certified a class action of California consumers who purchased Charmin/Proctor & Gamble’s “Freshmates” brand of “flushable” bathroom wet-wipes between April 6, 2011, and August 3, 2017. The class claims centered on the allegation that Freshmates were not “flushable” as advertised ... Keep Reading »

Are DC Federal Courts the Next Hotbed for Data Breach Class Actions?

August 4, 2017 by Carlton Fields

We have previously reported on the evolving circuit split over standing in data breach class actions. On August 1st, a three judge panel for the District of Columbia Circuit became the latest to weigh in on the issue. In Attias v. CareFirst, the DC Circuit panel joined the Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in finding that fear of future identity theft in the wake of a data breach satisfied the injury in fact requirement for standing under Article III of the United ... Keep Reading »

Ninth Circuit Holds ADA Certified Class Has Standing to Challenge Facilities Not Personally Visited by Plaintiff

June 30, 2017 by Carlton Fields

Plaintiff, seeking declarative and injunctive relief, brought a putative class action alleging that the city and county of San Francisco failed to comply with certain requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act, specifically alleging that many of San Francisco’s public rights-of-way, pools, libraries, parks, and recreation facilities were not readily accessible to and usable by mobility-impaired persons. Reversing in part the decision of the District Court for ... Keep Reading »

SCOTUS Holds American Pipe Tolling Does Not Apply to Securities Class Action Opt-Out Claims Filed Outside Repose Period: CalPERS v. ANZ Securities, Inc.

June 28, 2017 by Bruce Berman and Steven Blickensderfer

We have blogged about the evolution and application of the American Pipe tolling rule, as further expanded by Crown Cork, many times (here, here, here, and here), most recently following the Ninth Circuit’s Resh decision last month (here and here). Under American Pipe, individual claims of unnamed class members in a previously dismissed action may proceed as a subsequently filed class action after the limitations period would otherwise have expired. Today, we switch ... Keep Reading »

Game Over – SCOTUS Holds a Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice Is Not a Viable Means to Appeal a Denial of Class Certification

June 14, 2017 by David L. Luck and D. Matthew Allen

A group of plaintiffs hoped to hit the reset button on the Ninth Circuit’s denial of their Rule 23(f) petition to appeal from an order striking class allegations in their case against Microsoft, the maker of the popular Xbox line of videogame consoles. Plaintiffs, who alleged their Xbox 360 consoles had a tendency to scratch game discs, attempted this reset by appealing the certification order after taking a voluntary dismissal of their putative class action with ... Keep Reading »

Ninth Circuit Expands American Pipe Tolling to Subsequent Securities Class Action by Unnamed Class Members, but Leaves Related Comity and Issue Preclusion Questions for Another Day

May 30, 2017 by Bruce Berman and Steven Blickensderfer

The Ninth Circuit in Resh v. China Agritech, Inc., No. 15-55432, 2017 WL 2261024 (9th Cir. May 24, 2017), revived the third successive putative shareholder class action against a fertilizer manufacturer after the district court dismissed this last case as untimely. By reversing the lower court’s holding that the case was time-barred, the Ninth Circuit expanded the American Pipe tolling rule (as further expanded by Crown Cork) to allow the individual claims of unnamed ... Keep Reading »

A Damages Class Is Certified, but No Standing for Declaratory and Injunctive Class

May 10, 2017 by David L. Luck and D. Matthew Allen

A representative plaintiff who purchased Aveeno sunscreen products and baby bath products brought putative class actions against the products’ manufacturer, Johnson & Johnson, in the United State District Court for the District of Connecticut. Both of plaintiff’s asserted classes challenged Aveeno’s product labeling under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) and the similar consumer protection laws of several other states and the District of ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Next Page »

Get Weekly Updates!

2020 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • MDL Court Denies Class Certification of Proposed “NAS Babies” Class
  • What’s Good for Trial Is Good for Class Certification: Fifth Circuit Rules That Daubert Applies at Class Certification Stage
  • One Game, One Stadium: Eleventh Circuit Spikes Collateral Challenge to Tampa Bay Buccaneers Proposed Class Action Settlement

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Classified Logo
© 2014–2021 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.