Trying to catch a cab in New York City is not for the faint of heart. In addition to the traditional “yellow cabs,” which often treat the city streets like a NASCAR track, there are many “Black Car” companies that offer rides through dispatch systems that allow for scheduled pickups.
Class. Some litigants have it. Some don’t.
Picture this: you’re enjoying a lovely evening with friends inside a hole-in-the-wall restaurant in Brooklyn. As the evening is winding down, the clouds open up and give way to a torrential down-pour.
Whenever I see the names of the Iqbal and Twombly pleading cases, I can’t help but feel that the names were clipped from lost lines of Lewis Carroll’s Jabberwocky poem, perhaps as something similar to “Iqbal were the Civil Rules, and Twombly they did reign.”
In a recent blog post , we discussed the Ontario Court’s consideration of the existence of an identifiable class in deciding whether or not to certify a class action, both from an objective perspective (i.e. the existence of an identifiable class) and from a subjective perspective (i.e. whether or not the petitioner must prove that the members of the class “desire to pursue their claims by way of a class action”).
On September 11, 2014, in a sharply worded order that will give heart to the FDIC’s many other failed bank litigation targets, Eastern District of North Carolina Judge Terrence Boyle, applying North Carolina law, granted the summary judgment motion of the former directors and officers of the failed Cooperative Bank of Wilmington, N.C., in the lawsuit the FDIC had filed against them in its capacity as the failed bank’s receiver.
The unrelenting wave of wage and hour suits continues to roll through the high-tech industry.
Last week, in Sirko v. IBM, a federal district court in California rejected the plaintiffs’ efforts to use a rudimentary survey to establish Rule 23 class certification because the survey — designed and administered by plaintiffs’ counsel — “lack[ed] basic indicators of reliability.”
Despite Wal-Mart Stores V. Dukes, Ninth Circuit Approves Statistical Sampling to Prove That an “unofficial” Common Policy Exists
There seem to be two prevailing conceptions of class actions. In one view, a class action is a way of determining many similar claims at once by evaluating common evidence that reliably establishes liability (and lays a ground work for efficiently calculating damages) for each class member.
A recent decision denying certification of a proposed class action includes some noteworthy comments regarding the preferable procedure requirement.