Searching Content indexed under Court Procedure by Donald Falk ordered by Published Date Descending.
Links to Result pages
Supreme Court To Decide Whether All Evidence Supporting Removal Under The Class Action Fairness Act Must Be Submitted With The Notice Of Removal
To remove a civil action from state court to federal court, the defendant must "file ... a notice of removal ... containing a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal." 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a).
United States
8 Apr 2014
California Appellate Court Issues Major Decision On Enforceability Of Arbitration Agreements In Employment Context
Since Concepcion was decided, plaintiffs' lawyers have tried to distinguish it or limit its scope in a variety of ways.
United States
7 Jun 2012
California Supreme Court Holds That Diminished Subjective Value Satisfies Proposition 64 Standing Limitations For Unfair Competition and False Advertising Actions
The California Supreme Court has held that consumers who allege that their subjective motivation for purchasing a product or service was affected by a deceptive label or advertising — whether or not the alleged misrepresentation affected the market value of the product — have standing to sue under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq., and the closely related False Advertising Law (FAL), id. § 17500 et seq.
United States
3 Feb 2011
Ninth Circuit Holds That Defendants May Satisfy Amount-In-Controversy Requirement of Class Action Fairness Act by Identifying the Total Amount of Customer Charges Potentially in Dispute
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a defendant may remove a class action to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) if it can show that the putative class’s recovery potentially could exceed CAFA’s $5 million jurisdictional threshold.
United States
2 Dec 2010
US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Abandons Prior Interpretation of Class Action Fairness Act That Would Have Deprived Federal Courts Of Jurisdiction Over Most Consumer Class Actions
In "Cappuccitti v. DirecTV, Inc." (decided in July 2010), a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) does not provide jurisdiction over a class action unless the amount in controversy for one plaintiff’s (or class member’s) claim is at least $75,000.
United States
25 Oct 2010
US Supreme Court Justice Issues Stay in Case Involving Federal Due Process Constraints on State-Court Class Actions
Justice Scalia, acting in his capacity as Circuit Justice for the Fifth Circuit, recently issued a stay of a state-court judgment in a class action to allow the defendants to file a petition for certiorari.
United States
4 Oct 2010
Eighth Circuit Holds that Class Actions Under California Unfair Competition Law Must Meet Federal Standing Requirements for Absent Class Members
The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has held that a federal court cannot certify a class action seeking monetary relief under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) unless the class meets federal standing requirements.
United States
18 Aug 2010
Eleventh Circuit Decision Threatens To Eliminate Federal Jurisdiction Over Most Consumer And Employment Class Actions, Undermining The Goals Of The Class Action Fairness Act
The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit has just issued a decision that, if it is allowed to stand, will preclude federal jurisdiction over virtually all class-action lawsuits filed in, or removed to, federal courts within that circuit.
United States
22 Jul 2010
US Supreme Court Releases Opinion in "Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick"
On March 2, 2010, the Supreme Court held that the provision of the Copyright Act which requires authors to register their works before suing for copyright infringement, 17 U.S.C. § 411(a), is not a limitation on the federal courts’ subject-matter jurisdiction, but instead merely a "claim-processing rule" setting forth what a copyright holder must do before he or she may file a claim in court.
United States
12 Mar 2010
California Court of Appeal Confirms Limits on Role of Objectors to Class Settlements—And Warns That an Extraordinary Writ Petition May Provide the Only Practical Avenue for Appellate Review of Some Interlocutory Orders
On December 31, 2009, the California court of appeal reaffirmed the limited role of unnamed class members in class action settlements and cautioned that in some cases a party that does not immediately petition for an extraordinary writ in response to a plainly interlocutory order may effectively waive appellate review.
United States
11 Jan 2010
Actual Injury (and Standing) Necessary Only for Class Representatives, Not Absent Class Members, Under California’s Section 17200
Until California voters passed Proposition 64, anyone could sue on behalf of the “general public” using the unique representative action of California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL), the notorious Section 17200 of California’s Business and Professions Code.
United States
27 May 2009
California Court of Appeal Harmonizes State and Federal Pleading Requirements for Summary Judgment
On March 20, 2009, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District harmonized state and federal securities jurisprudence, signaling that summary judgment now may be as available in state-law derivative actions as it is in federal securities lawsuits.
United States
10 Apr 2009
California Appellate Court Invalidates Class-Arbitration Waiver in Employment Agreement
On March 10, 2009, a California appellate court held that an employee’s agreement to arbitrate on an individual basis was unenforceable with respect to a plaintiff-employee who had filed a putative class-action lawsuit alleging the denial of meal and rest periods.
United States
20 Mar 2009
Links to Result pages