Editor’s Note: This is a joint post for ClassActionBlawg and the newly-launched Baker Hostetler Class Action Lawsuit Defense Blog. Be sure to bookmark the Baker Hostetler blog at www.classactionlawsuitdefense.com for the latest in class action trends and decisions. A common temptation in class action litigation is to fashion procedures based on “rough justice” to avoid overburdening the courts or attempting [...]
Archive for the ‘Employment Class Actions’ Category
Trial By Formula, Statistical Sampling, and the Right to Due Process
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action Trends, Employment Class Actions, tagged drogin, due process, dukes, predominance, sampling, statistical sampling, statistics, trial by formula, wal-mart on April 6, 2012 | 1 Comment »
Think Dukes Was the End of the Employment Discrimination Class Action? Think Again.
Posted in Class Action Trends, Employment Class Actions, Federal Court Decisions, tagged 23(b)(2), 23(c)(4), class action, class certification, class treatment, disparate impact, dukes, employment discrimination, frcp 23, issue certification, mcreynolds, merrill lynch, posner, rule 23, seventh circuit, Supreme Court, wal-mart on February 29, 2012 | 2 Comments »
Last Friday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a significant employment class action decision that may challenge conventional wisdom about the impact of the Supreme Court’s 2011 decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes. The opinion, authored by respected Judge Richard Posner, is McReynolds v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., No. 11-3639 (7th Cir., Feb. [...]
Thoughts on Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Commentary, Employment Class Actions, Federal Civil Procedure, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged adverse impact, class certification, daubert, dukes, employment class action, expert witness, ginsburg, rigorous analysis, rule 23, scalia, statistical evidence, statistical proof, Supreme Court, wal-mart on June 20, 2011 | 5 Comments »
Many commentators correctly that the decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes would be favorable to business interests. However, unlike the Court’s earlier decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, the decision does not necessarily threaten to sound a death knell for class actions or even a particular category of class actions. Instead, the decision merely clarifies the standards on which future class actions are to [...]
Supreme Court Says No to Class Certification in Wal-mart v. Dukes
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Employment Class Actions, Federal Court Decisions, Supreme Court Decisions on June 20, 2011 | 2 Comments »
As was widely expected, the Supreme Court has overturned class certification in what has been called the largest employment discrimination class action in history. The slip opinion in Wal-mart v. Dukes, No. 10-277, (S. Ct. June 20, 2011). is available at the Court’s website. The justices were unanimous in finding that Rule 23(b)(2) did not [...]
Is the Key to Class Actions Under FRCP 23(b)(2) that the Plaintiff Seeks “Equitable” Relief, or that the Plaintiff Seeks “Monetary” Relief?
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Employment Class Actions, Federal Court Decisions, rule 23, tagged 23(b)(2), back pay, class action, dukes, employment discrimination, equitable, injunctive relief, monetary, posner, wal-mart on April 7, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Last week, Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner authored an opinion addressing one of the key issues awaiting a ruling by the United States Supreme Court this term, holding that an employment discrimination class action seeking back pay could not be certified under FRCP 23(b)(2). Here is a relevant excerpt from the opinion, Randall v. Rolls-Royce Corp., No. 10-3446, [...]
Wal-Mart v. Dukes Oral Argument Transcript
Posted in Class Action News, Employment Class Actions, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged back pay, commonality, dukes, employment discrimination, ginsburg, injunctive relief, kagan, oral argument, predominance, rule 23(b)(2), scalia, sotomayor, Supreme Court, typicality, wal-mart on March 29, 2011 | 1 Comment »
The Wal-Mart v. Dukes argument was held as scheduled today. Here is a Wal-Mart v. Dukes Oral Argument Transcript. Some initial observations: The beginning of the defendant’s argument was focused on the proper standard for reviewing whether the plaintiff had sufficiently common evidence of a uniform policy. It was not until later in the defendant’s [...]
Supreme Court Set to Hear Argument in Wal-mart v. Dukes Next Tuesday
Posted in Class Action News, Employment Class Actions, Supreme Court Decisions, tagged 23(a), 23(b), 23(b)(2), back pay, class action, dukes, employment class action, frcp 23, injunctive, Supreme Court, u.s. supreme court, wal-mart on March 25, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
The United States Supreme Court will hold oral argument next Tuesday, March 29, 2011, in case of Wal-mart v. Dukes, No. 10-277. The issue for review, at least so far, according to order granting certiorari, is: Whether claims for monetary relief can be certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2) – which by its terms [...]
Cert Granted in Walmart v. Dukes
Posted in Class Action News, Employment Class Actions, rule 23, Supreme Court Decisions, Uncategorized, tagged 23(b)(2), dukes, dukes v. wal-mart, employment class action, employment discrimination, scotus, u.s. supreme court on December 7, 2010 | 2 Comments »
Can plaintiffs seek back-damages using a class action vehicle that’s built for righting wrongs in equity through remedies like injunction? In the biggest work place class action ever, the United States Supreme Court has granted cert on the question of whether plaintiffs can use the Rule 23(b)(2) injunctive class procedure as a vehicle to seek money damages. [...]
Subscribe by Email
Twitter Feed: @classaction
- More Perspectives on Trends in Class Arbitration Waivers a Year After Concepcion bit.ly/LjFGTu 1 day ago
- California Supreme Court to Weigh in on Statistical Sampling bit.ly/KKBau8 4 days ago
- It’s Not too Late to Sign up for Next Week’s CLE Webinar on Statistics in Class Actions bit.ly/KGpifs 1 week ago
-
Our Contributors
-
Recent Comments
- More Perspectives on Trends in Class Arbitration Waivers a Year After Concepcion « ClassActionBlawg.com on Concepcion a Year Later, Are Consumer Class Actions Dead Yet?
- California Supreme Court to Weigh in on Statistical Sampling « ClassActionBlawg.com on Trial By Formula, Statistical Sampling, and the Right to Due Process
- Concepcion a Year Later, Are Consumer Class Actions Dead Yet? « ClassActionBlawg.com on Battleground TCPA
- Concepcion a Year Later, Are Consumer Class Actions Dead Yet? « ClassActionBlawg.com on NYT Dealbook Blog: Explaining the Securities Class Action Downturn
- Concepcion a Year Later, Are Consumer Class Actions Dead Yet? « ClassActionBlawg.com on Will AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion Really Kill the Consumer Class Action?
Archives
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- 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
More on Posner’s McReynolds Decision
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action News, Class Action Trends, Commentary, Employment Class Actions, tagged class action, disparate impact, dukes, employment class action, employment discrimination, issue certifiication, mcreynolds, posner, rule 23, wal-mart on March 2, 2012 | Leave a Comment »
For those readers who are interested in additional insights on Judge Posner’s opinion in McReynolds v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., No. 11-3639 (7th Cir., Feb. 24, 2012), which was the subject of Wednesday’s CAB post, here’s a link to an insightful executive alert on the decision, which was authored by colleagues in Baker Hostler’s New York office, partner Deborah [...]
Read Full Post »