Class Actions Brief Blog

We’ve commented before in this space about the ongoing debate concerning the relationship between the predominance requirement of Rule 23(b)(3) and “issue certification” under Rule 23(c)(4). Yesterday, the Sixth Circuit weighed in on the subject. See Martin v. Behr Dayton Thermal Prods., No. 17-3663 (6th Cir. July 16, 2018). The case related to a “Superfund site” comprising a “low income area” of some 540 proprieties outside of Dayton, Ohio. Typical of the languid track of most class action actions, the Sixth Circuit addressed the district court’s decision on an ...

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of June's filings:

Buffkin, et al. v. Hooks, et al., No. 1:18-cv-00502 (M.D.N.C. June 15, 2018) (purported class action brought by incarcerated persons alleging they have been diagnosed with hepatitis C and the N.C. Dept. of Public Safety and its officials have refused to treat them in violation of the 8th Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment and the Americans with Disabilities Act)

Hajjaj, et al. v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 3:18-cv-01637 ...

Updated 6-11-18: The Supreme Court’s decision earlier today in China Agritech confirms the validity of the observations in the original blog post below.  The Court held that American Pipe tolling does not apply to successive class actions.

In American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (1974), and Crown Cork & Seal v. Parker, 462 U.S. 345 (1983), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the pendency of a class action will toll limitations periods for absent class members until class certification is denied.

Much recent attention has been focused on China Agritech Inc. v. Resh

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of May's filings:

Thibodeaux v. Credit Protection Ass’n, L.P., et al, No. 1:18-cv-00469 (M.D.N.C. May 31, 2018) and Thibodeaux v. Enhanced Recovery Company, LLC d/b/a ERC, et al., No. 1:18-cv-00470 (M.D.N.C. May 31, 2018) (purported class action alleging defendant debt collection agency sent misleading and deceptive communications to consumers in order to coerce payment with threat of credit report harm in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act)

Yesterday, the United States Supreme Court, in a 5-4 opinion, held that an employer and its employees may agree to arbitrate claims on an individual, not a class-wide basis. Epic Systems Corp. v Lewis, No. 16-285 (U.S. May 21, 2018). Writing for the majority, Justice Gorsuch rejects the National Labor Relations Board’s view – in opposition to “77 years of precedent” – that the National Labor Relations Act “effectively nullifies the Arbitration Act.” The majority rendered its opinion against the backdrop of “battling briefs about the law’s meaning” from the ...

Loyal readers may notice that Carolinas Class Action received a facelift and has been renamed Class Actions Brief. Given our experience with class actions across the country, we want to broaden the scope in order to report on cases outside the Carolinas. We hope you find this expansion both interesting and informative, and we welcome your feedback.

Thank you for reading,
Adam Doerr and David Wright
Editors

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of April's filings:

Todd, et al. v. Norfolk Southern Corporation (D.S.C. April 23, 2018) (putative class action brought under the South Carolina General Railroad Law by land owners in Richland County who allege substantial property damage caused by heavy rains in October of 2015 due to the water course flow from a nearby creek being slowed/restricted by an embankment and train trestle that is owned, controlled and operated by Norfolk Southern)

Peters v. Carson ...

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of March filings:

Fryett v. Equifax Info. Servs., LLC, No. 5:18-cv-00109 (E.D.N.C. March 23, 2018) (purported collective and class action brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act against Equifax for alleged reporting of consumer civil judgment and lien information that is outdated and inaccurate)

Mode v. S-L Distrib. Co., LLC, et al., No. 3:18-cv-00150 (W.D.N.C. March 22, 2018) (purported collective and class action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour ...

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of February filings:

Burrell, et al. v. Gustech Commc’ns, LLC, No. 0:18-cv-00508 (D.S.C. February 21, 2018) (purported collective and class action brought under federal and state wage and hour laws alleging defendant misclassified satellite technicians as independent contractors and failed to pay overtime and minimum wages)

In re: Broiler Chicken Grower Litigation, No. 4:18-cv-00030 (E.D.N.C. February 21, 2018) (putative class action brought by broiler ...

The United States Supreme Court, in a 5-3 decision authored by Justice Alito, reversed a Ninth Circuit case concluding that detained aliens have a statutory right to periodic bond hearings during the course of their extended detention.  See Jennings v. Rodriguez,  ____ U.S. ____, No. 15-1204 (U.S. Feb. 27, 2018).  The Court found that the Ninth Circuit’s statutory interpretation in favor of detained noncitizens was “implausible.”  In pedagogical fashion, Justice Alito explained that the Ninth Circuit had turned the doctrine of “constitutional avoidance” on its ...