MenuClose
May 18

California Supreme Court Reins in Arbitration Waivers of Public Injunctive Relief Under Consumer Protection Laws

Last month the California Supreme Court ruled that an arbitration clause in a credit card agreement that waives the statutory right to seek public injunctive relief in any forum violates California public policy and is unenforceable.  In McGill v. Citibank, 2 Cal. 5th 945, 393… Read More

Mar 20

Springtime Reform: U.S. House of Representatives Passes the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017

On March 9, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2017 (“H.R. 985” or the “Act”), which would provide more stringent requirements for class certification in federal court.  The Act’s stated purpose is to “diminish abuses in class… Read More

Mar 07

Don’t Bury Your Arbitration Clause: Third Circuit Refuses To Enforce Arbitration Clause/Class Action Waiver

If you want to enforce an arbitration clause and class action waiver, don’t bury it on the 97th page of a product manual.  Instead, make sure consumers have reasonable notice of it.  That’s the lesson from the Third Circuit’s decision in Noble v. Samsung Electronics… Read More

Feb 02

When Is A Statutory Violation—Without More—Sufficient To Confer Standing

When the United States Supreme Court decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), a little over a year ago, many lawyers believed the court’s decision would settle a rather simple question: if a defendant violates a statute, is that sufficient for a… Read More

Jan 06

Ninth Circuit Rejects “Administratively Feasible” Requirement in Ascertainability Dispute

As expected, the Ninth Circuit has joined the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Circuits in rejecting the Third Circuit’s “administratively feasible” prong of the ascertainability requirement for class certification.  Briseno v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., — F.3d —, 2017 WL 24618 (9th Cir. Jan. 3, 2017).  But… Read More

Dec 15

Seventh Circuit Tosses “No Injury” FACTA Claim After Spokeo

The Seventh Circuit has issued the first opinion of a federal court of appeals addressing, under Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), whether a plaintiff has standing to sue under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et… Read More

Aug 09

The Second Circuit Blesses Post-Jury Verdict, Pre-Judgment Decertification

This post was co-authored by Carla Graff, a summer associate with Montgomery McCracken and Charles B. Casper, a partner and chair of Montgomery McCracken’s Class Action Defense Practice Group. How long does the judicial obligation to ensure proper class certification last? According to the Second Circuit, it… Read More

May 20

If You Conduct Business in New Jersey You Need to Review Your Online Terms and Conditions

Companies that do business in New Jersey have seen a sharp spike in class actions alleging their Web sites violate the New Jersey Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty, and Notice Act, 56 N.J.S.A. § 56:12-14, et seq. (“TCCWNA”).  The statute has caused headaches for companies for a… Read More

May 17

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Concrete Harm Is Required to Sue for Statutory Damages

For the second time in four years, the U.S. Supreme Court passed up an opportunity to decide what constitutes the concrete injury needed for standing when Congress authorizes individuals to sue for statutory damages for violation of a federal statute.  In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins,… Read More

May 12

“Non-GMO”: The Food Labeling Class Action Train Is NOT Running Out of Steam

This week, I shared perspectives on non-GMO labeling with respect to two topics that should be driving the discussion among those at the board room table and those serving as the company’s counsel: (1) what measures should food manufacturers contemplate to minimize risk exposure as… Read More