A California judge on Wednesday approved a $900,000 deal by The Hollywood Reporter’s parent company to end claims that it misclassified freelance content producers as independent contractors instead of employees, saying the deal, which will pay class members almost $15,000 on average, is fair, reasonable and adequate.
Marriott successfully got a California magistrate judge to toss a former employee’s putative class action alleging failure to pay the San Jose, California, minimum wage when the judge said Wednesday the Labor Management Relations Act preempts the worker’s claims, requiring the worker to first exhaust the grievance procedure.
The NCAA and 11 athletic conferences sued by student-athletes in antitrust suits over caps on scholarships on Tuesday won preliminary approval for a nearly $209 million deal on monetary claims after tacking on revisions that excluded claims in certain other athletes’ suits and modified class definitions.
A New York federal judge declined on Tuesday to dismiss Commerzbank AG’s billion-dollar suit against Bank of New York Mellon Corp. for allegedly failing to vet residential mortgage-backed securities it was supposed to oversee, finding several of the claims have legs.
A Maryland woman can't sue the makers of the "Game of War" mobile game under a state gambling losses law, the Fourth Circuit has ruled, saying the losses at issue involved virtual, not real money.
The U.S. Court of Federal Claims said Monday it will allow a member of the Sioux Indian Tribe of South Dakota to proceed with his claim that he didn’t receive his full share of the landmark $3.4 billion Cobell settlement over the alleged federal mismanagement of Native American trust funds.
The Ninth Circuit declined Monday to rethink reviving litigation alleging that a subsidiary of oil field services giant Schlumberger Ltd. violated the Fair Credit Report Act by failing to comply with disclosure requirements before procuring consumer reports for employment purposes, amending its previous opinion to further explain why a job applicant had standing.
The California federal judge overseeing allegations that Fiat Chrysler manufactured Dodge Ram trucks with defective steering components on Monday tentatively approved a rebate deal worth over $3.1 million, but asked for a "more palatable" check cashing period than the proposed 60 days.
The U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to hear a case brought by a man who alleged the Oneida Tribe of Indians in Wisconsin illegally printed too much credit card information on receipts, letting stand the decision by two lower courts that the tribe, as an independent nation, was precluded from a federal law governing credit reporting.
In an acknowledged change in course Monday, Delaware’s Supreme Court reversed a chancery dismissal of a public unit-holder's challenge to a $1 billion Enbridge Energy Co. LLC pipeline deal in 2015, citing viable claims that Enbridge acted in bad faith.
A credit card terminal company that contracts with Wells Fargo to process merchant payments has lost its bid to dismiss a putative class action over junk faxes, with an Illinois federal judge finding the complaint made clear enough allegations of legal liability.
The judge overseeing the Deepwater Horizon multidistrict litigation ruled Friday that plaintiffs whose pursuit of economic damages from the oil spill and resulting federal moratorium on Gulf of Mexico drilling were put on hold could opt out of a global settlement and bring their claims in court.
Former River Café waiters who say the pricey eatery in Brooklyn's DUMBO neighborhood stiffed them out of millions of dollars in tips and other wages over eight years were given a trial date Monday in a long-running paycheck action targeting owner Michael "Buzzy" O'Keeffe.
An Illinois federal judge on Thursday granted certification to a class of consumers alleging treadmill maker Precor Inc. sold them products with defective heart rate monitors on the issue of liability, but found that certification should be withheld on the issue of damages.
A California judge on Friday granted final approval to Allstate Insurance Co.'s deal paying $2 million to over 500 claims processors to end claims the workers were shorted on overtime and denied rest and meal breaks, ruling the parties had fixed problems that previously “worried” her.
An Arizona federal judge has tossed a proposed class action lawsuit challenging portions of the federal Indian Child Welfare Act as unconstitutional racial discrimination and the entire law as exceeding Congress’ power, finding Thursday that the claims were too hypothetical and that the plaintiffs therefore lacked standing.
The Ninth Circuit on Thursday sealed a win for Amgen Inc. in a proposed class action alleging the company pushed off-label uses of anemia drug Aranesp, finding the suit was time-barred in part because the widow anchoring the case had been tied to an earlier, similar suit.
An Illinois federal judge Friday tossed a Fair Credit Reporting Act suit over Mondelez Global LLC’s online job application, saying a procedural violation of the law was not sufficient for an applicant to bring suit against the food and beverage company.
GNC Holdings Inc. and a putative class of consumers in a “slack fill” lawsuit accusing the health products retailer of misleading customers with underfilled protein powder tubs agreed to end the suit, according to a filing in California federal court on Thursday.
The Ninth Circuit on Thursday affirmed the dismissal of a putative class action accusing Anheuser-Busch LLC of tricking Bud Light Lime-A-Rita drinkers into thinking the sugar-loaded beverage is low-calorie, ruling that the "light" appellation isn't deceptive because the malt beverage does have fewer calories than a traditional margarita.
The importance of authenticity is magnified when trying a case outside your home jurisdiction. While using references to local landmarks or history can help make arguments relatable, adopting local expressions or style in an attempt to ingratiate oneself with the judge and jury almost always backfires, say William Oxley and Meghan Rohling Kelly of Dechert LLP.
In last year's Spokeo ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court checked the wave of class actions against companies for technical violations of disclosure requirements under myriad consumer protection statutes, by adding an injury-in-fact requirement for plaintiffs. But federal courts are having trouble applying this standard, interpreting its impact on class certification of consumer plaintiffs in varying ways, says Edmund O'Toole of Venable LLP.
As demonstrated by the Ninth Circuit's decision in Syed v. M-I, when requesting a consumer report and taking adverse action based on a consumer report, it is important for employers to develop and follow policies for complying with the Fair Credit Reporting Act, says Kersten Holzhueter of Spencer Fane LLP.
A multidistrict litigation can be a sound and efficient way of managing a mass tort, or it can be an unwieldy disaster. A recent decision by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, denying a plaintiffs’ motion for centralization in the Proton-Pump Inhibitor Products Liability Litigation, shows that some MDLs are more trouble than they're worth, says Stephen McConnell of Reed Smith LLP.
One key provision of the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act that has not garnered substantial attention affords class action litigants a compulsory right to appeal an order granting or denying class certification. This element of the bill will have a significant impact on litigants and will likely change the legal landscape of class action jurisprudence, say Kymberly Kochis and Veronica Wayner of Eversheds Sutherland LLP.
The past year has seen the momentum turn in favor of mutual fund advisers in the current wave of “excessive-fee litigation.” The New Jersey district court's recent opinion in Kasilag v. Hartford is insightful both for what it found with respect to Hartford and for its potential application to the more than 20 other pending cases, say attorneys with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP.
In reversing the district court’s ruling in Valdez v. Terminix, the Ninth Circuit recently highlighted the federal and state court divide over whether California Private Attorneys General Act claims may be compelled to arbitration, say Cary Sullivan and Chris Waidelich of Jones Day.
As a trial lawyer, you make instantaneous decisions in courtrooms all the time, but that day was different. I had to balance my advocate’s concern for the class of investors I represented against the empathy I felt for a fellow human being’s tragic loss, says Nicholas Chimicles of Chimicles & Tikellis LLP.
In Norcia v. Samsung, the Ninth Circuit ruled that a consumer is not bound to an arbitration clause in a warranty brochure in a box containing a purchased product if the box does not call attention to the existence of the clause. This emphasizes the importance of the old-fashioned concept that a party must have notice of and assent to a contractual provision in order to be bound by it, say Jay Bogan and Allen Garrett of Kilpatrick ... (continued)
The Third Circuit's recent ruling in Class 8 Transmission Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation — agreeing with the district court’s denial of class certification — gives insights into the intricate legal and economic issues that indirect purchaser plaintiffs and defendants must grapple with when litigating the class certification issue, say Stefan Meisner and Ashley McMahon of McDermott Will & Emery LLP.