Interesting Post-Comcast Class Certification Decisions Keep Coming

Interesting Post-Comcast Class Certification Decisions Keep Coming

On September 30, 2013, Judge George B. Daniels of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in Johnson, et al v. Nextel Communications, Inc., et. al., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141445 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2013) certified a class action –  pursuant to Rule 23(c)(4) – of 587 employees of Nextel Communications, Inc. (“Nextel”) who allege that Nextel, and the former plaintiffs’ law firm representing these employees, engaged in various illegal acts against them by entering into a Dispute Resolution Settlement Agreement (“DSRA”) to resolve their employment discrimination claims.

Sixth Circuit’s Recent Certification Ruling is Making a Splash in the Seventh Circuit’s Whirlpool Washer Case

Sixth Circuit’s Recent Certification Ruling is Making a Splash in the Seventh Circuit’s Whirlpool Washer Case

As we reported two weeks ago, the Sixth Circuit on July 18 re-affirmed the certification of a liability-only class of Ohio consumers following the Supreme Court’s directive that it reconsider its previous affirmation of the same class in light of the decision in Comcast v. Behrend,133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013). 

The Undeniable Fact of a Pro-Big-Business Supreme Court

Three years ago, Professor Richard Epstein of the University of Chicago was peddling falsehoods and misconceptions about malpractice law that wouldn’t pass a 1L Torts class. Via Walter Olson, I see he’s back with a piece titled, “The Myth of a Pro-Business SCOTUS,” claiming “Commentators inaccurately condemn the five conservative justices as corporate shills.”

Unpaid Intern Decision May Provide Second Circuit the Opportunity to Clarify Its Position On Class Certification in Light of Comcast

Unpaid Intern Decision May Provide Second Circuit the Opportunity to Clarify Its Position On Class Certification in Light of Comcast

As we wrote about previously, the legality of unpaid internships is a hot issue this summer, with courts struggling over two issues: (1) whether employers must classify entry-level “interns” as employees under the law, and therefore pay them at least minimum wage and overtime, and (2) whether the job conditions of groups of interns are similar enough so that class action treatment is appropriate.