Plaintiffs’ lawyers love to challenge products labeled as “natural,” with hundreds of false advertising class actions filed in just the last few years. Recently, in Astiana v. Hain Celestial (pdf), the Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of one such class action, and in doing so, addressed some key recurring arguments made at the pleading stage

In ERISA stock-drop class actions, plaintiffs routinely allege that their employers breached a duty of prudence by permitting employees to invest their retirement assets in their company’s stock.  Until today, defendants typically defended against such claims by invoking a judicially crafted presumption that offering company stock was prudent.  Today, in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer

In what circumstances should you be permitted to invest your retirement savings in your own employer’s stock? We have blogged before about an ERISA class action pending at the Supreme Court regarding when plan fiduciaries must prevent participants from investing in employer stock. After the Solicitor General filed an amicus brief (pdf) asking the Court

Should 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

The plaintiffs’ bar loves the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”)—which prohibits certain unsolicited phone calls and text messages—because it provides for statutory damages of up to $1,500 per violation and thus is a great vehicle for shakedown class actions against businesses.  One recent wave of questionable TCPA class actions asserts that messages sent to confirm receipt of unsubscribe requests violate the TCPA.  Although the notion is absurd, some businesses targeted by these lawsuits have agreed to settlements rather than risk defending themselves in the court hand-picked by the plaintiff.

But last week, a federal district court in California finally ruled on a motion to dismiss in one such class action—and granted it.


Continue Reading