We have seen a continued trend by the Supreme Court in the New York First Department to consolidate asbestos cases.
Fourth Circuit Puts Teeth into Ascertainability, Commonality, and Predominance Requirements for Class Certification
Sometimes it’s hard to know who’s in a class without substantial individualized inquiries. Can a court certify a class of persons with allegedly similar injuries by pigeonholing the question of class membership as a question of damages to be determined later?
Since the Supreme Court held in Clapper v. Amnesty International that a possible future injury must be “certainly impending” in order to confer standing, every case that has addressed standing in data breach class actions (except for one from the Southern District of California) “has held that the mere threat of future harm is insufficient to confer standing in a data breach case.”
Accessible Technology: Redbox DVD Rental Kiosk Class Action Settlement Highlights Litigation Risk Presented by Self-Service Equipment
They are sprouting up everywhere: Kiosks that allow customers to buy tickets, rent DVDs, get boarding passes, check-in at a hotel, count change, and even rent cars without ever having to interact with a human being.
In this matter, the plaintiff brought an action in the Los Angeles County Superior Court alleging that the defendant breached contracts with its California customers by charging unauthorized fuel surcharges and excessive fees.
Different Experiences of Navy Chaplains Doom Effort to Certify a Rule 23 Class for “Institutional Reform” in Workplace Bias Case
Sometimes, class certification decisions read to us like checklists, where a judge will recite line and verse the requirements under Rule 23 one by one, and often find that all of them are satisfied with little discussion of the evidentiary basis for the rulings.
In our June 4, 2014 article on cyber security and cyber governance[i] we noted that for many reasons, boards of directors and executives of U.S. companies needed to reexamine how they protect (and respond to the successful hacking of) their most critical intellectual property and customer information.
The Alabama Supreme Court recently decided that a brand name drug maker can be held liable for warnings on a generic medication even if it was produced by another company.
LawPro can breathe a sigh of relief – a recent decision suggest that clients are unlikely to succeed in certifying class actions against their former lawyers based on the terms of their retainer agreements.