Class Actions

In determining whether the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act (SLUSA) preempts a state court class action alleging fraud in connection with securities transactions, a district court should not dismiss the action without first allowing the plaintiff leave to amend—as it might do so to eliminate class claims and by that or other means avoid SLUSA preemption. Read More

A stipulation that “at least 67%” of class members had last known California addresses was insufficient to show greater than 2/3rds of class members were California citizens, but plaintiff should be allowed discovery to prove that fact which is necessary to invoke CAFA’s local controversy exception. Read More

In a class action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, statutory damages are limited to the lesser of $500,000 or 1% of the defendant's net worth, and the net worth calculation is the plaintiff’s burden to prove just as all the other elements are. Read More

Retired former lab employees who sued the University of California claiming that it had unconstitutionally impaired their contractual rights to post-retirement health benefits were entitled to class certification after management of their health benefits plans passed to successor manager of the lab, who proceeded to institute less favorable policies. Read More

The trial court abused its discretion in denying class certification to two consolidated cases seeking tax refunds on behalf of LLCs which had paid tax under a statute later determined to be unconstitutional, since the proposed class was ascertainable, and presented a predominant common issue. Read More

In a junk fax case brought under the TCPA, the recipient's "prior express invitation or permission," like consent in an unsolicited telephone call case, is an affirmative defense with respect to which the court, when weighing class certification, considers only the defenses the defendant has actually advanced and for which it has presented evidence. Read More

American Pipe tolling during the pendency of an initial class action does not toll the statute of limitations for a follow-on class action, but only for individual suits by members of the putative class in the initial class action. Read More

A second class action is entitled to American Pipe tolling of the statute of limitations during the pendency of a first class action on the same claim if the first action is dismissed for lack of an adequate class representative and a new named plaintiff is promptly added. Read More

Although inadmissibility alone is not a proper basis to reject evidence submitted in support of class certification, the district court should still test expert evidence by the Daubert standard and consider whether it is likely plaintiff will be able to prove the same facts with admissible evidence by the time of trial. Read More

Judgment in earlier wage & hour class action that employees filed against their staffing company employer barred later suit on the same claims by same employees against the firm where they worked since that firm was the staffing company’s agent with respect to payroll matters. Read More

When an arbitration agreement is not covered by the FAA, Courts evaluate whether the agreement’s class waiver provision is unenforceable under the four-part Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443 test. Read More

A class member who has already been given a chance to opt out of Rule 23(b)(3) class is not entitled to a second opt-out opportunity after the parties settle the case. Read More

Before considering an expert’s opinion on a class certification motion, the court must determine whether the opinion is admissible under the Sargon test. Read More

Unnamed class members do not have standing to appeal from a class judgment or attorney fees award unless they intervene or move to vacate judgment. Read More

If the forum state's choice-of-law rules require the application of only one state's laws to the entire class, then the representation of multiple states within the class does not pose a barrier to class certification, but if class claims require adjudication under the laws of multiple states, then the court must determine whether common questions will predominate over individual issues. Read More

A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying class certification to a plaintiff in a suit challenging a hospital’s billing practices when any reasonable value determinations concerning the services provided to putative class members would substantially involve individual considerations regarding the patients' treatment, insurance, and charges. Read More

A plaintiff seeking to remand a case to state court cannot meet his or her burden of proving that at least 2/3rds or more of the class members are citizens of the home state when the plaintiff’s definition of the class makes it impossible to determine the class size. Read More

Uncertainty regarding class members’ damages does not prevent certification of a class as long as a valid method has been proposed for calculating those damages such as, here, a full refund of the purchase price based on defendant’s suggested retail price and the price the individual plaintiff paid.  Read More

A collective bargaining agreement explicitly requires arbitration of wage and hour claims by referencing a wage order; so long as a Private Attorney General Act claim survives, decertification of a class is not immediately appealable. Read More

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification in this suit for overtime compensation by claims examiners, since plaintiff had not shown that it could prove, by common evidence, that all of the claims examiners in the proposed class actually worked overtime; hence there was no preponderance of common issues.   Read More