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?
A powerful weapon in any policyholder’s arsenal is the potential to argue that an insurer waived its right to rescind a policy or deny coverage. Successfully arguing waiver may allow a policyholder to obtain coverage even where it is alleged to have made material misrepresentations in the policy application or failed to meet a condition precedent.
On July 25, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit refused to accept a Rule 23(f) interlocutory appeal in a case where an employer had asked the district court to decertify a hostile work environment class in light of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013).
Coming on the heels of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dudenhoeffer decision, which eliminated a pro-fiduciary presumption with respect to company stock holdings in qualified retirement plans, the 4th Circuit issued a decision last week that could cause even more unrest for plan fiduciaries.
It was the best of times for ACA subsidies, it was the worst of times for ACA subsidies.