Class Actions Brief Blog

Since the Supreme Court’s opinion in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021), litigants and courts alike have struggled to determine whether certain intangible harms are “concrete, particularized, and actual or imminent” such that a plaintiff has standing to sue. Indeed, this blog has previously analyzed cases addressing that question here and here.

The Fourth Circuit weighed in recently, holding that a subset of plaintiffs whose drivers’ license numbers were leaked and published online had standing to sue, but the plaintiffs whose numbers were leaked and ...

In Labcorp v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court was poised to decide if a federal court can certify a class that includes members who lack any Article III injury.  But as we discussed last month, the oral argument suggested that a procedural snag would stop the Court from deciding that question.

Sure enough, the Court has now decided not to decide the class-action question in Labcorp.  In a one-sentence order issued yesterday, June 5, the Court dismissed its review of the case as improvidently granted.  That order leaves the Ninth Circuit decision in Labcorp intact and the legal issue that has ...

A few months ago, we wrote about the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in Labcorp v. Davis.  As we noted at the time, Labcorp raises a long-debated question of class-action law:  Can a federal court certify a class that includes members who lack any Article III injury?  As we also noted, the Supreme Court was expected to answer this question almost a decade ago in Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, but ultimately did not resolve it.

The wait may go on.  The Supreme Court held oral argument in Labcorp on April 29.  After more than two hours of discussion, most of the Justices appeared to ...

Life has its disappointments. Sometimes, you think you’ve won a free car, but it turns out that you’ve won only a couple of dollars. And sometimes, you think that an appellate court will clarify a thorny issue of class-action law, but the court leaves that issue unresolved. These scenarios coalesced in a recent decision from the North Carolina Supreme Court: Surgeon v. TKO Shelby LLC.

The Surgeon case arose when hundreds of people allegedly suffered the first disappointment above. A car dealership mailed out flyers that advertised a scratch-off contest. According to the ...

Our colleague Erik Zimmerman reported in an earlier post the memorable declaration from defense counsel in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021): when a legal violation results in no harm, those involved should “break out the champagne,” not “break out a lawsuit.”

In TransUnion, decided in 2021, the Supreme Court grappled with a question that has vexed federal courts in recent years: how much leeway should plaintiffs have to bring federal suits based on “intangible harms”? Article III courts have been redressing obvious harms to person and pocketbook since the ...

On Aug. 18, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued an opinion in the long-running Marriott Data Breach MDL Litigation. The Fourth Circuit reversed a district court’s class certification decision, holding that the district court erred in certifying damages classes against the Marriott defendants without first addressing, as a threshold issue, the potential enforceability of a “class-action waiver” that could be applicable to all members of the putative class. The Court of Appeals also reversed the district court’s certification of issue ...

Limiting exposure to future claims is a crucial aspect of settling class action litigation. A recent opinion out of the Northern District of Georgia serves as a reminder that the definitions of settlement classes and released claims in class action settlement agreements warrant close attention.

First, the background. In 2015, a customer filed a putative class action against LGE Community Credit Union, alleging that LGE improperly assessed overdraft fees based on accounts’ available balances instead of customers’ ledger balances, in violation of LGE’s standard member ...

Class actions have long been difficult to certify in fraud cases.  But a recent district court decision in California takes a new approach that would make class certification in fraud cases the norm.  That decision is now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit, where Robinson Bradshaw filed an amicus brief on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America.  Our brief highlights the flaws in the district court’s decision and the damage that its approach to class certification would inflict on American businesses and the national economy.  This post summarizes our brief.

In DZ ...

At oral argument in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, TransUnion’s counsel told the U.S. Supreme Court that a lack of harm is a reason “to break out the champagne, not to break out a lawsuit.” The Court has now decided TransUnion, and its decision may make it harder for class-action plaintiffs to sue for non-traditional harms. As a result, class-action defendants may be inclined to pop a cork or two. The full implications of the decision remain to be seen, however, so the best course for now may be to keep the refreshments on ice.

TransUnion was a class action brought under a federal statute ...

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

Nelson v. Flagship Credit Acceptance, LLC, No. 3:18-cv-02074 (D.S.C. July 27, 2018) (putative class action alleging defendant vehicle loan servicing agency emailed collection information to hundreds of customers at the same time, revealing confidential customer information in violation of state privacy laws)

Planned Parenthood South Atlantic, et al. v. Joshua Baker, No. 2:18-cv-02078 (D.S.C. July 27, 2018) (putative class action against ...

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 ...

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)

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 ...

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

Sciabacucchi v. Snyder’s-Lance, Inc., et al., No. 3:18-cv-00049 (W.D.N.C. January 29, 2018) (previously reported similar action as Shaev Profit Sharing Account v. Snyder’s-Lance, Inc., et al., No. 3:18-cv-00039 (W.D.N.C. January 25, 2018) wherein shareholders allege financial harm from issuance of a false proxy statement for a proposed merger transaction between Snyder’s-Lance and Campbell Soup Company)

Shaev Profit Sharing ...

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

Hicks, et al. v. Houston Baptist University, No. 5:17-cv-00629 (E.D.N.C. December 20, 2017) (putative class action brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act against Houston Baptist University for alleged solicitation of consumers for college classes via telephone calls using an automated telephone dialing system)

Martinez, et al. v. Alpha Technologies Services, Inc., et al., No. 5:17-cv-00628 (E.D.N.C. December 20, 2017)

Not every class action court filing in North and South Carolina becomes a full-length post on our blog. Here is a recap of November's filings: Fox, et al. v. SCANA Corporation, et al.; No. 3:17-cv-03063 (D.S.C. November 10, 2017) (previously reported similar action brought by customers of SCANA: this putative class action is brought under federal securities laws by holders of securities of SCANA who allege defendant released false and misleading documents and statements regarding a nuclear construction project in Fairfield County thereby causing them financial harm) Ridgeway ...

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

Laverty, et al. v. Niagara Bottling, LLC; No. 5:17-cv-00196 (W.D.N.C. October 31, 2017) (collective action brought under FLSA against Niagara Bottling LLC, a national water and/or beverage bottling company, by “preventative maintenance technicians” who allege they were not paid overtime compensation for required tasks performed, and also under FMLA by the lead plaintiff for alleged violation of his rights regarding the death of a ...

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

Carlin, et al. v. Hudson Seafood Corp., d/b/a Hudson’s Seafood House on the Docks, et al., No. 9:17-cv-02638 (D.S.C. September 29, 2017) (putative collective and class action brought under federal and state wage and hour employment laws by alleged nonexempt employees of defendants in Beaufort County who were allegedly paid less than minimum wage and also had a portion of their earned tips placed in a “tip pool”)

Delmater, et al. v. SCANA ...

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

Clark, et al. v. Harrah’s NC Casino Company, LLC, et al.; No. 1:17-cv-00240 (W.D.N.C. August 31, 2017) (purported collective and class action brought under federal and state wage and hour laws by “gaming floor employees” alleging defendants violated these laws by failing to pay regular wage and overtime compensation by requiring them to perform work during their meal breaks)

Dibble, et al. v. Williams & Fudge, Inc., et al.; No ...

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

Prince, et al. v. Perfect Delivery, Inc., et al.; No. 8:17-cv-01950 (D.S.C. July 24, 2017) (purported collective and class action brought by delivery drivers against defendants, which operate Papa John’s franchises in North and South Carolina, alleging defendants used flawed methods to determine reimbursement rates for the drivers who used their own vehicles for delivery, thereby causing their wages to fall below federal minimum wage ...

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:

Lopez, et al. v. Ham Farm, LLC et al., No. 2:14-cv-00030 (E.D.N.C. June 30, 2017) (purported collective and class action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour laws by migrant agricultural workers against sweet potato farm to recover allegedly unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation).

Sneed, et al. v. Reynolds American Inc., et al., No. 1:17-cv-00584 (M.D.N.C. June 26, 2017) (putative class action asserting securities violations ...

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:

Kasprzyk, et al. v. Hilton Grand Vacations Company, LLC, et al., No. 4:17-cv-01393 (D.S.C. May 26, 2017) (purported collective and class action brought under FLSA alleging defendants deducted wages, straight time and overtime pay from commissions earned.)

Berg, et al. v. Span-America Medical Systems, Inc., et al., No. 6:17-cv-01399 (D.S.C. May 26, 2017) (putative class action alleging defendants, who entered into an agreement and plan of merger ...

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:

Sanda, et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., et al., No. 6:17-cv-00988 (D.S.C. April 17, 2017) (putative class action brought under federal and various state consumer protection laws alleging defendants manufactured defective home washing machines that caused damage during normal usage and additionally had a flawed recall of this product.)

Krebs, et al. v. Charlotte School of Law, LLC, et al., (originally filed in M.D.N.C. on December ...

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's filings:

Angeles-Gomez, et al. v. Rick Wolf Landscape, LLC, et al., No. 2:17-cv-00009 (E.D.N.C. March 31, 2017) (putative collective and class action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour laws by current and/or former employees of the defendant landscaping and lawn care business and its managing members for alleged unpaid overtime compensation).

Isaman, et al. v. Housekeeping Services of Hilton Head, LLC, et al., No. 9:17-cv-00800 (D.S.C. March 26 ...

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's filings:

Bradley, et al. v. Samsung Electronics, et al., No. 1:17-cv-00171 (M.D.N.C. February 28, 2017) (purported class action brought under various state consumer protection and trade practice laws alleging defendants manufactured home washing machines with a defect that caused explosion during normal use.)

Matthews, et al. v. TCL Communication Inc.,  No. 3:17-cv-00095 (W.D.N.C. February 27, 2017) (putative class action removed from ...

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

Hieber v. The Asset Recovery Group, LLC, et al., No. 3:17-cv-00214 (D.S.C. January 24, 2017) (putative class action brought on behalf of consumers residing in South Carolina alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act).

Hart v. Barbeque Integrated., No. 2:17-cv-00227 (D.S.C. January 24, 2017) (collective and class action alleging defendant restaurant failed to pay tipped employees minimum wage and overtime compensation ...

Barchiesi, et. al. v. Charlotte School of Law, LLC, et. al., No. 3:16-cv-00861 (W.D.N.C. December 22, 2016) (putative class action against Charlotte School of Law for alleged false and misleading representations related to the school’s failure to provide current and prospective students with information about its noncompliance with ABA standards for accreditation).

Whitehead v. Lutheran Homes of South Carolina, Inc., No. 3:16-cv-03937 (D.S.C. December 16, 2016) (putative class action and purported collective action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour laws ...

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

Anstrom v. Best Logistics Group, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01365 (M.D.N.C. November 29, 2016) (purported class action and collective action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour laws by freight brokers alleging defendant misclassified employees and failed to pay overtime).

Pasqual v. Cempra, Inc., et. al., No. 1:16-cv-01356 (M.D.N.C. November 22, 2016) (putative class action filed on behalf of shareholders of Cempra, Inc., a clinical-stage ...

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

Stephens, et. al. v. Shoretel SC LLC, et. al., No. 4:16-cv-03515 (D.S.C. October 28, 2016) (purported collective action brought under FLSA alleging customer service representatives were not paid overtime while working for defendant’s call center).

Blunt v. Belk, Inc., No. 3:16-cv-00745 (W.D.N.C. October 27, 2016) (notice of removal of putative class action brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act alleging Belk failed to provide ...

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

Dvorsky v. George Salama, D.C., No. 1:16-cv-01180 (M.D.N.C. September 27, 2016) (putative class action brought under the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act alleging that defendant chiropractic medical practice obtained protected personal information from DMV records and accident reports to market its chiropractic services in violation of the Act).

Sheffield v. BB&T Corp., et. al., No. 7:16-cv-00332 (E.D.N.C. September 23, 2016)

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

Kirkpatrick v. Cardinal Ally, Inc., No. 1:16-cv-01088 (M.D.N.C. August 28, 2016) (collective action and class action asserted under FLSA and state wage and hour laws alleging defendant managed healthcare organization misclassified care coordinators as exempt employees).

Ailsworth v. Harbor Inn Richland, Inc., et. al., No. 3:16-cv-02946 (D.S.C. August 26, 2016) (purported collective action and class action brought under FLSA and state ...

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

Ford, et. al. v. Ford Motor Co., No. 1:16-cv-00239 (W.D.N.C. July 14, 2016) (putative consumer class action alleging the Ford Explorer has a manufacturing defect which allows exhaust emissions to leak into passenger cabins).

Swinger v. Breg, Inc., et. al., No. 1:16-cv-00955 (M.D.N.C. July 14, 2016) (collective action and class action brought under FLSA and state wage and hour laws for unpaid wages and overtime arising from defendants’ alleged ...