Tag Archives: Class Action

Fifth Circuit Holds That The District Court Must Assure That the Class Recieves Notice of Attorney Fees Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h), Even If No Party Objects to Its Omission

In Morrow v. Jones, No. 23-40546 (5th Cir. June 10, 2025), the Fifth Circuit holds that it is reversible error for the district court to not issue notice of a motion for attorney fees as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(h), even if nobody objects to the omission. In a Fourth Amendment caseContinue reading “Fifth Circuit Holds That The District Court Must Assure That the Class Recieves Notice of Attorney Fees Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h), Even If No Party Objects to Its Omission”

Split Ninth Circuit Panel Holds That Plaintiff Who Filed Original Securities Fraud Action Ceased to Be a Party When Court Appointed a Different Lead Plaintiff Under the PSLRA

In Habelt v. iRhythm Technologies, Inc., No. 22-15660 (9th Cir. Oct. 11, 2023), a 2-1 panel holds that the original putative lead plaintiff in a securities fraud case was no longer a “party” with standing to appeal when a different lead plaintiff was appointed by the district court under the Private Securities Litigation Reform ActContinue reading “Split Ninth Circuit Panel Holds That Plaintiff Who Filed Original Securities Fraud Action Ceased to Be a Party When Court Appointed a Different Lead Plaintiff Under the PSLRA”

Eighth Circuit Holds That There Is No Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Removed Case Once Plaintiff Amends Their Complaint to Strip Out All Federal-Law Allegations, Noting Split with Second and Fifth Circuits

In Wullschleger  v.  Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., No. 22-1796 (8th Cir. July 31, 2023), on its second trip to the Eighth Circuit, the court holds that a class-action plaintiff successfully outfoxed the defendants by promptly amending their removed complaint to strike out all federal-law allegations, thus depriving the district court of subject-matter jurisdiction. This isContinue reading “Eighth Circuit Holds That There Is No Subject-Matter Jurisdiction Over Removed Case Once Plaintiff Amends Their Complaint to Strip Out All Federal-Law Allegations, Noting Split with Second and Fifth Circuits”

Unanimous En Banc Eleventh Circuit Says “Whoops,” Overrules 2019 Decision on Standing in TCPA Case to Bring Itself in Line with Other Circuits

In Drazen v. Pinto, No. 21-10199 (11th Cir. July 24, 2023), the en banc Eleventh Circuit reverses itself and holds that a single junk text confers Article III standing on a consumer under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii). See my May 27, 2021 post on the same topic.Continue reading “Unanimous En Banc Eleventh Circuit Says “Whoops,” Overrules 2019 Decision on Standing in TCPA Case to Bring Itself in Line with Other Circuits”

Sixth Circuit Rejects “Juridical Link” Doctrine to Extend Class Standing to Defendant Who Did Not Injure the Named Plaintiff, Splitting with Seventh Circuit

In Fox v. Saginaw Cnty., Mich., No. 11-1265 (6th Cir. Apr. 28, 2023), the Sixth Circuit holds that even in a putative Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 class action, a representative plaintiff only has standing to sue the entities that injured them. It rejects the “juridical link” doctrine adopted by the Seventh Circuit in PaytonContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Rejects “Juridical Link” Doctrine to Extend Class Standing to Defendant Who Did Not Injure the Named Plaintiff, Splitting with Seventh Circuit”

Split Eleventh Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) Grants No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Remand to State Court Under CAFA If the District Court Grants It Sua Sponte

In Ruhlen, et al. v. Holiday Haven Homeowners, Inc., No. 21-90022 (11th Cir. Mar 10, 2022), owing to a quirk in the statutory language, a 2-1 panel holds that 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) – which ordinarily allows a U.S. Court of Appeals to hear an appeal “from an order of a district court granting orContinue reading “Split Eleventh Circuit Panel Holds That 28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1) Grants No Appellate Jurisdiction Over Remand to State Court Under CAFA If the District Court Grants It Sua Sponte”

Class Waiver of Appeals from Award Determinations Enforced by Fifth Circuit, Sidestepping the Issue of Who the Proper Appellee Might Be

In Frego v. Settlement Class Counsel, No. 20-30596 (5th Cir. Oct. 27, 2021), the panel sidesteps an “odd” question of who the proper appellee might be in a “closed” fund class settlement, holding instead that the plaintiff-appellants waived the right to appeal the award under the class settlement. “After ten years of litigation, a classContinue reading “Class Waiver of Appeals from Award Determinations Enforced by Fifth Circuit, Sidestepping the Issue of Who the Proper Appellee Might Be”

“Home State” Exception to Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction Does Not Apply Where the “Primary Thrust” of the Case Is Liability Against an Out-of-State Defendant, Fifth Circuit Holds

In Madison v. ADT LLC, No. 21-90028 (5th Cir. Aug. 24, 2021), the panel holds that the district court should have disregarded the nominal in-state defendant when evaluating the “home state” exception to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(4)(B). It holds that primary defendants include those at whom a lawsuit isContinue reading ““Home State” Exception to Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction Does Not Apply Where the “Primary Thrust” of the Case Is Liability Against an Out-of-State Defendant, Fifth Circuit Holds”

No Interlocutory Appeal of Interim Fee Award Paid Directly by Defendant, Holds Ninth Circuit

In AdTrader Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 20-15542 (9th Cir. July 30, 2021), the Ninth Circuit holds that an interim award of fees in a class action that is paid by the defendant, rather than through a common fund, is not subject to an interlocutory appeal. Google LLC runs advertising platforms for digital ads, andContinue reading “No Interlocutory Appeal of Interim Fee Award Paid Directly by Defendant, Holds Ninth Circuit”

Sixth Circuit Holds Computer-Generated Log of Faxes Were Not Hearsay, But Were Properly Excluded for Lack of Authentication

In Lyngaas v. Curaden AG, No. 20-1199 (6th Cir. Mar. 24, 2021), a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action, the court affirms the district court’s orders concerning the admissibility of a summary-report log that purportedly identified the class members who were called. The class action alleged that the defendants faxed unsolicited ads to thousandsContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Holds Computer-Generated Log of Faxes Were Not Hearsay, But Were Properly Excluded for Lack of Authentication”