Class Actions Brief Blog

Earlier this year, the Fourth Circuit published an updated roadmap for addressing objections to class settlement. The decision, 1988 Trust for Allen Children Dated 8/8/88 v. Banner Life Insurance Co., 28 F.4th 513 (4th Cir. 2022), will be an important resource for parties hoping to bypass objections en route to settlement. It will also be an important guidepost for class members pursuing objections with hopes of slowing down settlement traffic.

Allen Trust clarifies—for the first time in the Fourth Circuit—the burden of proof that applies when a class member objects to ...

Updated 8-16-22: StarKist and the other defendants filed their petition for certiorari in the Olean Wholesale Grocery case. A link to the Petition is here.

In September 2021 and again in June of this year, we wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Olean Wholesale Grocery v. Bumble Bee Foods and the court’s opinion following rehearing en banc. The defendants in Olean obtained a extension to file a certiorari petition with the Supreme Court through August 8, 2022, so the last word may not have been written in Olean.

On July 5, 2022, the Ninth Circuit issued another notable class ...

If you’re an Uber rider, you’re probably familiar with Uber’s requests that you rate your driver. It’s a five-star rating system. Five is the best. One is the worst.

As it turns out, those ratings are vitally important to Uber drivers. Uber requires its drivers to maintain a minimum star rating.

This post is about how that rating system prompted a class action on racial discrimination — and about what a recent decision in that case teaches about how to prove classwide discrimination.

In 2015, Uber drivers in San Diego had to maintain a rating of at least 4.6 stars. A San Diego Uber ...

Last September, we wrote about the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Olean Wholesale Grocery v. Bumble Bee Foods and the court’s decision to rehear the case en banc.  The en banc Ninth Circuit has now waded back into the class certification waters, with mixed results for defendants.  While the en banc court tossed back the panel’s holding that the presence of more than a de minimis number of uninjured class members is fatal to certification, it also clarified certain procedural matters under Rule 23 that may lead to smoother sailing for defendants at the certification stage.

As we ...

Last month, the United States House of Representatives passed the Forced Arbitration Injustice Repeal Act, or the “FAIR Act.” The FAIR Act, should it be passed by the Senate and signed into law, would prohibit class action waivers and mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements in a wide range of disputes:

• Employment disputes that arise out of or relate to the work relationship or prospective work relationship, including disputes regarding discipline and/or termination of employment and terms of payment for advertising, recruiting, referrals and arrangements.
• Consumer ...

As class action litigation under ERISA continues its upward trend across the country, could Article III standing serve as a means through which a Court can fairly assess claims before costly discovery is imposed on defendants and judicial resources are expended? Several recent federal court decisions suggest as much.

ERISA, which provides protection to employees who participate in employee benefit plans, confers statutory standing on plan participants and beneficiaries to seek relief against their benefit plans as well as fiduciaries of these plans in federal court. Although ...

A leading feature of the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes is the “rigorous scrutiny” the trial court must apply to determine whether the evidence plaintiffs offer to support class certification meets the requirements of Rule 23. Following the Supreme Court’s decisions in Wal-Mart and Comcast, “[i]t is now indisputably the role of the district court to scrutinize the evidence before granting certification, even when doing so ‘requires inquiry into the merits of the claim.’” Rail Freight, 725 F.3d at 253 (D.C. Cir. 2013) (quoting Comcast ...

In order to have a class certified, the plaintiffs have the burden of proving to the satisfaction of the court, “after a rigorous analysis,” that they comply with Rule 23—that is, that “there are in fact sufficiently numerous parties, common questions of law or fact, etc.”  Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 350-51 (2011) (internal quote omitted).  One of the findings required by Rule 23 is that common issues predominate, as discussed in last month’s blog post by Travis Hinman.  Predominance as to damages requires a showing that the members of a proposed class were ...

The extent to which the presence of uninjured class members may defeat class certification remains unsettled. While, standing alone, the existence of some uninjured class members may not be not fatal (depending on the circuit), just how many is too many to satisfy the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3) is still in flux.

The Ninth Circuit waded into this debate earlier this year in Olean Wholesale Grocery Coop. Inc. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC. Before the case made its way to the appellate court, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California certified three classes ...

Bankruptcy, like the class action, is a form of collective adjudication. It is usually regarded as an alternative to the class action, in which the rights of creditors (often in the hundreds, thousands, or even millions) against one or more debtors can be determined through special procedures that need not meet the requirements for class certification.

A recent decision, however, posed a variation on the traditional dichotomy: is the class action a viable remedy for redressing alleged violations of bankruptcy law by classes of debtors?

Putative Class Alleging Discharge ...