A group of public sector workers sued more than a dozen unions and union locals in Oregon federal court on Thursday, seeking years' worth of union representation fees for a proposed class of nonmembers, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's Janus ruling.
A California federal judge has agreed to send back to state court a wage-and-hour suit brought by a group of former Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. workers, finding that the amount of money in controversy fell short of the threshold necessary for the federal court to hear the case.
An Arkansas federal judge has denied class certification in a lawsuit alleging Southwestern Energy Co. underpaid royalties to natural gas drilling rights holders, finding that the complex patchwork of wells, leases and integration orders involved does not make for a clearly definable group of plaintiffs.
An Illinois federal judge agreed that an Uber user leading a proposed Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action against the ride-hailing company consented to arbitrate any disputes when he signed up for the app, sending the suit to arbitration Thursday.
Kentucky’s attorney general urged the state’s highest court Thursday to topple a controversial pension reform law backed by the state’s governor, arguing that the law’s last-minute passage flouted the Kentucky Constitution, which the high court has a “sacred duty” to enforce.
Attorneys for “opioid babies” whose mothers used prescription narcotics argued on Thursday for new multidistrict litigation focused on the infants, citing “grave concerns” that an existing MDL over the opioid crisis is woefully deficient.
A California federal judge seemed skeptical Thursday about whether a proposed class of PayPal shareholders’ data breach suit could move forward, saying his “biggest issue” was the suit’s reliance on confidential witnesses, whose allegations were “pretty amorphous,” especially when it came to showing the company knowingly hid the breach in an early press release.
A Massachusetts federal magistrate judge has told Anderson & Wanca and Swartz & Swartz PC that they failed to submit sufficient evidence of the firms' expenses that went into striking a $4.75 million deal with Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. to end class action allegations of unsolicited faxes.
HD Supply Holdings Inc. cannot squash a securities suit accusing the company and executives of lying about inventory setbacks after a Georgia federal judge found that the proposed class presented enough evidence that the alleged lies caused a 20 percent drop in stock price.
A proposed class of immigrant parents who have been detained and separated from their children under Trump administration policy faced off with the federal government in California federal court on Thursday, debating whether an injunction can be imposed to ensure mental health care is provided to the families.
U.S. District Judge Jed S. Rakoff issued an order in New York federal court on Wednesday for a $10,000 sanction to be imposed against the attorney of an objector to the $3 billion Petrobras settlement, saying the attorney intended to “extort a payment” by delaying the settlement.
Carnival passengers who were stranded at sea in a 2013 incident known as the “Poop Cruise” asked the Eleventh Circuit on Thursday to reconsider an August decision to toss their suit, saying the ruling runs counter to U.S. Supreme Court precedent.
Uber told the Ninth Circuit on Wednesday that its recent finding that federal law doesn’t preempt California’s decades-old standard for determining whether workers are employees or independent contractors should dismantle a class of hundreds of thousands of Uber drivers alleging they were misclassified and denied expense reimbursements and tips.
The Ninth Circuit on Thursday revived a proposed class action accusing gym chain Crunch San Diego LLC of spamming members' cellphones with promotional text messages, finding that a recent D.C. Circuit decision led to an expanded definition of an autodialer under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
A 13-hospital health system has again urged a Wisconsin federal judge to toss a proposed class action stemming from two phishing attacks, arguing the plaintiffs haven’t raised a single example of traceable harm.
A lending company owned by the Otoe-Missouria Tribe of Indians has urged the Fourth Circuit to send claims in a proposed class action by Virginia borrowers to arbitration, saying the arbitration provisions in the borrowers’ loan agreements are enforceable and don’t illegally seek to block the application of federal law.
Counsel for Ford workers alleging they work in a severely hostile environment of sexual harassment urged an Illinois federal judge Thursday to certify their claims as a class, saying it would protect their right to relief that wasn't contemplated in a different deal the automaker entered with federal employment regulators.
American Century on Thursday asked a Missouri federal judge to strike certain portions of the testimony of an expert witness in an Employee Retirement Income Security Act class action brought by former employees, a move made the same day a bench trial in the case finished up.
Hewlett Packard Co. will pay a class of printer customers $1.5 million, not including attorneys' fees, to resolve allegations over phony error messages that popped up when users tried to install third-party ink cartridges, under a settlement proposed Tuesday in California federal court.
The Third Circuit on Thursday refused to revive a putative securities class action against Hertz Global Holdings Inc. over allegedly false and misleading statements about its financial condition and internal controls, saying the explanation that former company executives engaged in mismanagement is more plausible than shareholders' claims of a systemic fraud.
In TIAA-CREF Insurance Appeals, the Delaware Supreme Court struck a blow to insurers seeking to avoid responsibility for settlement payments made by policyholders. Though decided under New York law, this opinion opens the door to a fact-specific analysis that may help policyholders facing similar denials, say Catherine Doyle and Jan Larson of Jenner & Block LLP.
In Martinez v. Landry Restaurants, a California state appeals court recently held that the time period during which a federal appeal from an order remanding a case to state court is pending should be included when calculating the “five-year rule” for bringing a case to trial. This shows that all counsel should consider whether to seek a stay of proceedings where the case crosses jurisdictional boundaries, says Karin Bohmholdt of Greenberg Traurig LLP.
A California federal court's refusal last week to reconsider Davis v. Electronic Arts magnifies the manifest errors in its recent decision by ignoring the blatantly obvious identifiability of the former NFL players, says Ronald Katz of GCA Law Partners LLP.
It is at this point axiomatic that the Trump administration is intent on reversing significant portions of the Obama administration's regulatory activity. Interestingly, it seems that courts may pose another major risk to the survival of some Obama-era initiatives, say Andrew Oringer and Samuel Scarritt-Selman of Dechert LLP.
In Sacerdote v. New York University — the first university 403(b) employee retirement plan fee case to go to trial — a New York federal court recently ruled in favor of NYU. Arthur Marrapese of Barclay Damon LLP summarizes the university's fiduciary practices and explains how they helped it prevail at the trial level.
In this new series featuring law school luminaries, Widener University Delaware Law School dean Rodney Smolla discusses teaching philosophies, his interest in First Amendment law, and arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court in Virginia v. Black.
A Massachusetts federal court ruled last year in Gustavsen v. Alcon Laboratories that the plaintiffs’ attacks on the size of eye drops were a challenge to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's approved dose of that product. Last week, the First Circuit affirmed — proving that weak, lawyer-driven litigation can still produce good decisions on preemption, says James Beck of Reed Smith LLP.
This fall, in New Prime v. Dominic Oliveira, the U.S. Supreme Court will be presented with two important questions related to the Federal Arbitration Act’s Section 1 exemption. The ruling could have major ramifications for the transportation industry, where arbitration provisions are often included in employment or independent contractor agreements, says Cary Sullivan of Jones Day.
A few weeks ago, the IRS proposed regulations related to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act's 20 percent deduction on qualified business income for pass-through entities. The guidance offers long-awaited clarity, but is mostly bad news for many law firms, says Evan Morgan of Kaufman Rossin PA.
Judicial impeachment fever seems to be spreading through the states, with West Virginia legislators recently voting to remove their state's entire Supreme Court, and lawmakers in Pennsylvania and North Carolina threatening the same. These actions are a serious threat to judicial independence, says Jan van Zyl Smit of the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law.