Shedding Light On Shady Grove: Rule 23 Trumps State Law

Law360, New York (July 21, 2015, 12:55 PM EDT) -- Some state consumer protection statutes provide a private cause of action, but expressly prohibit it from being pursued on behalf of a class. What happens when a claim under such a statute is pursued in federal court, where Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure expressly allows for class certification? This conundrum was addressed in a new opinion by the Eleventh Circuit in Lisk v. Lumber One Wood Preserving LLC, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11891 (11th Cir. July 10, 2015) that is likely to have significant ramifications around the country for cases involving similar state statutes.

Dealing a blow...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!


Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!