Supreme Court May Clarify Procedures for Removal Under CAFA—if It Decides to Answer the Question Presented in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. V. Owens
This morning I attended oral arguments at the Supreme Court in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens. The issue presented in Dart Cherokee is whether a defendant who wishes to remove a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) is required to submit evidence supporting federal jurisdiction along with the notice of removal.
As we’ve commented before, class actions frequently take on a life of their own. They involve large sums of money, frequently raise difficult discovery and case management issues, and are subject to surprises for all the litigants.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario today denied certifying a “misclassification” class action claiming overtime pay. In doing so, the Court confirmed that where job descriptions of the proposed class are variable they do not have common issues.
Until 2006, McDonald’s Corp. was an investor in Chipotle restaurants, and according to Chipotle, there is still “a popular misconception that Chipotle restaurants are owned by McDonalds.”
In its long-awaited June 2014 decision in the Halliburton case, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to jettison the fraud on the market theory on which the presumption of reliance is based, but it did provide that defendants could attempt to rebut the presumption of reliance by showing that the alleged misrepresentation that is the basis of the plaintiffs securities claim did not impact the share price of the defendant company’s securities.
A limo driver believes that he should be paid overtime. He brings a lawsuit on both state and federal wage & hour laws. But he believes that other similarly situated drivers should also be part of his lawsuit.
Settling a workplace class action is far more complicated than resolving other types of litigation. Yet, the fundamental building blocks of settling a case – an offer, acceptance of precise terms, and substantiation of the agreement – are equally as important in resolving a simple as well as a complex piece of litigation.
In a creative approach to class actions, the parties in Fulawka v The Bank of Nova Scotia asked a recently retired Court of Appeal judge to arbitrate class counsel fees after the parties settled the main issue (see our earlier post ). The arbitrator awarded fees of $10.45 million to class counsel.
In January 2014, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell raised eyebrows (and ire) when he announced that the league was considering eliminating the extra point after a touchdown.