Third party litigation funding has become intriguing development in the expansion of global class and collective action litigation over the past several years, particularly in Australia. (For various previous CAB articles addressing third party litigation funding, click here). The concept of third party litigation funding generally refers to financing of litigation by a private party or corporation that is [...]
Archive for January, 2011
Is Victoria Province About to Top the ATRF’s List of Judicial Hellholes?
Posted in Class Action Trends, International Class Action Law, tagged australia class action, australian class action, contingency fee, contingent fee, fee sharing, fee splitting, IMF, IMF Australia, international class action, litigation funding on January 28, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Workplace and Securities Class Action Trends
Posted in Class Action Trends, Reports and Surveys, tagged class action report, employment class action, employment litigation, m & a class action, securities class action, wage and hour class action, workplace class action, workplace litigation on January 25, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
I’m late for my Inns of Court dinner, so time does not permit me to elaborate in detail, but I wanted to point out two recent class action-related reports of note. Be sure to check them out. 1) Seyfarth Shaw’s Seventh Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report. 2) Cornerstone Research, Securities Class Action Filings, 2010 [...]
Research Guide to Consumer Protection Laws of All 50 States
Posted in Lawyers' Resources, Practice Tips, tagged 50 states, consumer class action, consumer fraud, consumer protection, little ftc, research guide, research paper on January 20, 2011 | 1 Comment »
While doing research for another article today, I came across a terrific resource that could come in handy to any lawyer who handles consumer class actions. It is a 2005 article from Alan S. Brown and Larry E. Hepler entitled Comparison of Consumer Fraud Statutes Across the Fifty States, 55 Fed’n Def. & Corp. Couns. Q. 263 (2005). [...]
California Court of Appeal Decision Applying the Filed Rate Doctrine to Insurance Rates Stays Published
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action News, Class Action Trends, Consumer Class Actions, tagged 21st century, california court of appeal, consumer class action, filed rate doctrine, insuance rate, insurance class action, mackay, ratemaking on January 19, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
The filed rate doctrine is an important concept that comes into play in many consumer class actions, including those against public utilities, telecommunications providers, and insurers, that challenge the amounts charged by a regulated provider for its services. In its broadest sense, the doctrine holds that a regulated entity cannot be sued for charging allegedly excessive rates if [...]
Moose Collision Litigation, the Wave of the Future in Canadian Class Actions?
Posted in Class Action Humor, Class Action Trends, International Class Action Law, tagged british columbia, canada class action, canadian class action, class action in canada, international class action, manitoba, moose class action, moose collision, negligence class action, newfoundland class action on January 12, 2011 | 1 Comment »
If you’re a Canadian class action lawyer looking for next big thing in class actions, moose collision litigation was looking pretty promising. As mentioned in this October 19 CAB entry, a class action was filed against the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for alleged negligence in introducing moose into the area early last century, causing an excessive [...]
A Breach of Contract Doesn’t Equal Fraud, and Other Observations
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Consumer Class Actions, Federal Court Decisions, tagged aftermarket parts, avery, breach of contract, CAFA, Class Action Fairness Act, consumer class action, consumer fraud, federal jurisdiction, fiduciary, fraud, geico, greenberger, insurance class action on January 11, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Two colleagues separately sent me a copy of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision yesterday in Greenberger v. GEICO General Insurance Co., slip op., No. 09-1603 (7th Cir., Jan. 10, 2011) (Sykes, J.), so I thought it was worthy of a summary. Greenberger involved would-be class action claims against an insurer for the alleged practice of not [...]
Supreme Court Adds a Fourth Class Action Case to its Docket
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Federal Civil Procedure, Federal Court Decisions, Securities Class Actions, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged burden of proof, class certification, erica p. john fund, fraud on the market, halliburton, price inflation, scotus, securities class action, securities fraud, Supreme Court, u.s. supreme court on January 7, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Instead of a trilogy of class action decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court this term, it looks like there will be a “quadrilogy“! For the fourth time in the October 2010 Term, the Court has granted certiorari in a class action-related case. Today, the Court granted cert in Erica P. John Fund, Inc. v. Halliburton Co., No. 09-1403. The [...]
Supreme Court Set to Hear Oral Argument in Smith v. Bayer on January 18
Posted in Class Action News, Federal Civil Procedure, Federal Court Decisions, rule 23, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged anti-injunction, baycol, class certification, collateral estoppel, enjoin state court class, federal injunction, personal jurisdiction, res judicata on January 5, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
In my 2010 wrap up posted last week, I neglected to mention one of the three class action-related cases in which the United States Supreme Court granted cert in 2010. Smith v. Bayer is an appeal of a case that did make my top 10 list, In re Baycol Products Litigation, 593 F.3d 716 (8th Cir. 2010). The Court granted cert last September to [...]
Subscribe by Email
Twitter Feed: @classaction
- Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy – An Indispensible Practice Guide http://t.co/ZBOfBUnp 2 days ago
- Demanding More from Outside Counsel http://t.co/yCNtmNrG 3 days ago
- Netherlands Court Reaffirms Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Approving Collective Settlement http://t.co/n4tBMpyU 1 week ago
-
Our Contributors
-
Recent Comments
- Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy – An Indispensible Practice Guide « ClassActionBlawg.com on Looking for a Primer on Drug and Device Products Liability Litigation? Look No Further.
- Page not found « ClassActionBlawg.com on Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 6 – Paths to (Mass) Justice
- Hetty on Presentation Materials for Tomorrow’s Webinar on Class Action Objectors
- Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 6 – Paths to (Mass) Justice « ClassActionBlawg.com on Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 5 – Who Has Jurisdiction in a Global Market?
- Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 6 – Paths to (Mass) Justice « ClassActionBlawg.com on Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 4 – Giving Away Money
-
Recent Posts
- Drug and Device Product Liability Litigation Strategy – An Indispensible Practice Guide
- Netherlands Court Reaffirms Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in Approving Collective Settlement
- Demanding More from Outside Counsel
- Notes from the 5th Annual Conference on the Globalization of Class Actions and Mass Litigation, Session 6 – Paths to (Mass) Justice
- Presentation Materials for Tomorrow’s Webinar on Class Action Objectors
Archives
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
Posts by Date
-
-
Tags
“Like” Us On Facebook
Paul Karlsgodt
Raj Chohan
CAB Staff
Is Smith v. Bayer a Case About Class Action Abuse or Abuse of Federal Power?
Posted in Commentary, Federal Civil Procedure, Federal Court Decisions, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged anti-injunction, collateral estoppel, federalism, in re baycol, issue preclusion, judgment, relitigation exception, roberts court, scotus, smith v. bayer, states' rights, u.s. supreme court on January 18, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court held oral argument in Smith v. Bayer, which raises the question of a federal court’s power to enjoin a state court from considering class certification after the federal court had previously denied certification. A copy of the argument transcript is available for download at the Supreme Court’s website. Some of the key [...]
Read Full Post »