The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), which regulates the conduct of debt collectors, authorizes plaintiffs suing over violations to recover statutory damages of up to $1,000. Because these amounts can rapidly add up to exorbitant numbers in a class action for very minor, technical violations, Congress capped the total amount of statutory damages that… Continue Reading
Category Archives: Superiority
Subscribe to Superiority RSS FeedLipton v. Chattem, Inc.: Federal District Court Denies Certification On Adequacy Grounds
Posted in Adequacy, Class Certification, Predominance, SuperiorityThe requirement that the named plaintiff must be an adequate class representative is not often the basis for denying class certification. But a recent decision from the Northern District of Illinois in a false-advertising class action illustrates the importance of taking discovery on facts that are relevant to the adequacy standard. In Lipton v. Chattem,… Continue Reading
Seventh Circuit: A “Shapeless, Free-Wheeling” Trial Plan Is Grounds for Decertifying Class
Posted in Class Certification, Employment, Predominance, Rule 23(b)(2), SuperiorityThe Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in Espenscheid v. DirectSat USA, LLC—authored by Judge Posner—is full of good news for employers and other class-action defendants. The case is a hybrid collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (pdf) and opt-out Rule 23(b)(3) class action asserting state-law wage-and-hour claims. The plaintiffs—a group of home satellite-dish installers who… Continue Reading
Can a Product-Liability Class that Is Full of Uninjured Members Be Certified?
Posted in Class Certification, Predominance, SuperiorityThe answer is a resounding “no,” says Judge Cormac Carney of the Central District of California in a recent significant decision in litigation over the third generation Toyota Prius and 2010 Lexus HS250h vehicles (In re Toyota Motor Corp. Hybrid Brake Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig. (pdf), No. SAML 10-2172-CJC (C.D. Cal. Jan. 9,… Continue Reading
Federal Government Acknowledges Undue Risk of Potentially Massive Liability from Class Actions for Statutory Damages Under the Federal Credit Reporting Act, but Proposes a Solution Good for One Defendant Only
Posted in Class Action Trends, Class Certification, Motions Practice, Superiority, U.S. Supreme CourtTomorrow, the Supreme Court will hear argument in United States v. Bormes, a case that apparently has not captured the attention of most class action practitioners. That’s understandable: The question presented (pdf) is “whether the Little Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), waives the sovereign immunity of the United States with respect to damages actions for violations… Continue Reading
Second Circuit: Insufficient Notice of Class Action Settlement Means That Class Members Can Bring Copycat Class Actions
Posted in Appeals, Class Action Settlements, Class Certification, Rule 23(b)(2), SuperiorityThe Second Circuit’s recent decision in Hecht v. United Collection Bureau, Inc., No. 11-1327 (2d Cir. Aug. 17, 2012), should sound alarm bells for any business that attempts to settle a class action. The takeaway from the decision is to make sure that notice of the settlement to absent class members is adequate. Under some… Continue Reading
Lawyer-Driven Class Action Challenging ATM Fee Notices Flunks Superiority Requirement
Posted in Class Certification, SuperiorityWe recently reported on a class settlement in which no members of the class submitted claims. The plaintiffs in that case contended that the defendant violated the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) by failing to post a notice on its ATMs that consumers would be charged a fee for using the machines. More recently, in… Continue Reading
Class Action Attacking Product Defect Declared Moot When Company Voluntarily Recalled Challenged Product
Posted in Adequacy, Class Action Trends, Class Certification, Motions Practice, SuperiorityShould a class action go forward when the company voluntarily has provided all the relief plaintiffs have sought? At least in some circumstances, the answer is “no,” according to the Tenth Circuit. Here’s some background. Many product manufacturers—and especially auto makers—are targeted by the class action bar when they announce voluntary recalls. The lawsuits typically… Continue Reading