The Colorado Supreme Court’s highly anticipated rulings in four class actions were announced earlier today. Here are links to the opinions. I’ll have more commentary on the four decisions soon: No. 09SC668 – Jackson v. Unocal Corp. – Judgment Reversed (class certification upheld) - Addresses the burden of proof on class certification. No. 09SC1080 – Garcia v. [...]
Posts Tagged ‘rigorous analysis’
Colorado Supreme Court Issues Four Decisions Addressing Class Action Issues
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action News, Class Action Trends, Colorado Civil Procedure, Colorado Class Action News, tagged asbestos, bp america, burden of proof, causation, class cert, class certification, class-wide proof, colorado supreme court, common evidence, common proof, crcp 23, garcia, jackson, medved, patterson, preponderance, reliance, reyher, rigorous analysis, rule 23, state farm, unocal on October 31, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Don’t Miss Next Week’s CBA-CLE Legal Connection Program, Wal-Mart v. Dukes: Reshaping Class Certification
Posted in CLE Programs, tagged 23(b)(2), class certification, classwide proof, cle, common proof, commonality, continuing legal education, daubert, disparate impact, dukes, employment class action, expert testimony, rigorous analysis, scotus, statistical evidence, Supreme Court, wal-mart on July 5, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Along with leading Colorado Employment attorney Todd J. McNamara, I’ll be presenting at a breakfast seminar at the CBA-CLE next Tuesday with the (hopefully) self-explanatory title: Wal-Mart v. Dukes: Reshaping Class Certification. The particulars follow below. Hope to see you there! When: July 12, 2011 8:30 AM – 9:30 AM Where: CLECI Large Classroom 1900 Grant Street, Suite 300 [...]
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 [...]
Colorado Supreme Court to Hear Oral Argument in Four Class Action Cases
Posted in Class Action News, Colorado Civil Procedure, Colorado Class Action News, tagged c.r.c.p. 23, class certification, class certification standard, colorado class action, colorado rules of civil procedure, colorado supreme court, common proof, crcp 23, daubert, fraud on the market, presume reliance, presumed reliance, presumption of reliance, rigorous analysis, schrek on February 28, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Matt Masich of Law Week Colorado has a good article out today previewing oral arguments scheduled for tomorrow in four class-action related cases. The outcome of these cases could have a dramatic effect on class action practice in the state. The issues to be considered include the proper standard for reviewing class certification, the burden of proof on class certificeation, the [...]
2010 Class Action Year in Review
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action Fairness Act, Federal Court Decisions, Supreme Court Decisions, Uncategorized, tagged 23(b)(2), all writs act, baycol, CAFA, CAFA removal, civil rights class action, class action review, Class Action Trends, class arbitration, class arbitration waiver, discrimination class action, diversity jurisdiction, dukes, FAA, foreign cubed, morrison, nerve center, preemption, rigorous analysis, shady grove, stolt-nielsen, top ten lists, wal-mart, year in review on December 31, 2010 | 1 Comment »
As 2010 winds down, it’s time to review the key developments in class action law. It was an especially busy year for the federal courts, and in particular the U.S. Supreme Court, on issues impacting class action practice. Here, in chronological order, are 10 key developments from the year that was: January 5 – In In [...]
Recent Trends in Federal Class Certification Standards
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action Trends, Federal Civil Procedure, rule 23, tagged american honda motor, class certification, class certification standard, class certification trends, daubert, dukes v. wal-mart, eisen, expert testimony, frcp 23, in re ipo, regression analysis, rigorous analysis, rule 23, statistical evidence on May 4, 2010 | 1 Comment »
I’m embarrassingly late in reporting on them, but I would be remiss if I did not mention two key recent United States Circuit Courts of Appeals decisions addressing the legal standards governing class certification under FRCP 23: In American Honda Motor Co. v. Allen, No. 09-8051 (7th Cir., April 7, 2010) the Seventh Circuit held that a district court abused [...]
From the Annals of Class Action Jurisprudence – 1973 – Second Circuit Decision Could “Bring an End to Mass Class-Action Lawsuits”
Posted in Commentary, legal history, tagged class action history, class certification, eisen, eisen rule, merits determination, rigorous analysis on September 22, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
While doing some research today on another issue, I came across this news clipping from the May 3, 1973 issue of the St. Petersberg Times discussing a federal court of appeals decision in a class action decided a few days before. The article begins: NEW YORK – A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of [...]
Expert Testimony and the Rigorous Analysis Standard
Posted in Lawyers' Resources, Reports and Surveys, rule 23, tagged expert testimony, frcp 23, rigorous analysis, rule 23, white paper on July 9, 2009 | Leave a Comment »
Economist David Gulley, Ph.D., of Navigant Consulting, has authored an informative white paper entitled Recent Trends in Rule 23 Class Certification Expert Analysis. Dr. Gulley’s article explores the expanding role of experts and increased scrutiny over expert opinion testimony in class certification proceedings in light of recent federal appellate decisions placing renewed emphasis on the rigorous analysis standard. See the Second Circuit’s [...]
Third Circuit Examines Impact of the Rigorous Analysis Standard on Conflicting Expert Testimony
Posted in Antitrust Class Actions, Class Action Decisions, Federal Court Decisions, tagged antitrust class action, antitrust injury, class certification, falcon, frcp 23, hydrogen peroxide, rigorous analysis, rule 23 on December 30, 2008 | 1 Comment »
Shannon P. Duffy of The Legal Intelligencer has authored an article summarizing the Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litigation, No. 07-1689 (3d Cir., Dec. 30, 2008), which the article calls a “ruling that is sure to be required reading for antitrust lawyers.” The decision also addresses more general class certification issues that are [...]
Subscribe by Email
Twitter Feed: @classaction
- Please Excuse the Silence http://t.co/5W6sDX9G 5 days ago
- Recognition and Enforcement of U.S. Class Action Judgments and Settlements in European Civil Law Countries http://t.co/HaFz8NEi 1 week ago
- Baker Hostetler Employment Class Action Blog – Much More than Quality Employment Class Actions News http://t.co/G2h0tGLe 2 weeks ago
-
Our Contributors
-
Recent Comments
- Recognition and Enforcement of U.S. Class Action Judgments and Settlements in European Civil Law Countries « ClassActionBlawg.com on 2010 Class Action Year in Review
- Baker Hostetler Employment Class Action Blog – Much More than Quality Employment Class Actions News « ClassActionBlawg.com on … More on Amex III
- Baker Hostetler Employment Class Action Blog – Much More than Quality Employment Class Actions News « ClassActionBlawg.com on … More on Amex III
- … More on Amex III « ClassActionBlawg.com on The Third Circuit Clarifies the Facts About FACTA While the Second Circuit Has a Different Concepcion of Class Arbitration Waivers
- The Third Circuit Clarifies the Facts About FACTA While the Second Circuit Has a Different Concepcion of Class Arbitration Waivers « ClassActionBlawg.com on Second Circuit Deals Another Blow to Class Arbitration Waivers
-
Recent Posts
- Please Excuse the Silence
- Recognition and Enforcement of U.S. Class Action Judgments and Settlements in European Civil Law Countries
- Baker Hostetler Employment Class Action Blog – Much More than Quality Employment Class Actions News
- … More on Amex III
- The Third Circuit Clarifies the Facts About FACTA While the Second Circuit Has a Different Concepcion of Class Arbitration Waivers
Archives
- 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
Jackson v. Unocal – Class Actions Find a Welcome Home in Colorado
Posted in Class Action Decisions, Class Action Trends, Colorado Civil Procedure, Colorado Class Action News, Commentary, tagged bp america, class action, class certification, colorado, colorado supreme court, conditional certification, crcp 23, decertification, dukes, frcp 23, garcia, jackson, medved, patterson, reyher, rigorous analysis, rule 23, state farm, unocal, wal-mart on November 2, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decisions in Smith v. Bayer and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, I have wondered aloud whether we would start to see a significant divergence between the standards applicable to class certification in the state and federal courts. (See the Parting Thoughts Section of this August 31 SCOTUSBlog Post). My home state [...]
Read Full Post »