Originally published October 18, 2010

Keywords: Class Action Fairness Act, CAFA, consumer

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. This ruling deprived federal courts in the Eleventh Circuit of jurisdiction over virtually all consumer class actions (and many other class actions), as the plaintiffs in those cases tend to have modest claims.

Reflecting an unusual consensus about the consequences of the panel's decision, both parties to the appeal petitioned for rehearing. In addition, Mayer Brown lawyers filed an amicus brief in support of rehearing on behalf of the US Chamber of Commerce and CTIA—The Wireless Association arguing that the panel's decision would undermine CAFA's purpose of ensuring a federal forum for significant class actions. Mayer Brown also issued a report on the panel's initial decision.

On October 15, 2010, the Eleventh Circuit granted panel rehearing and replaced its prior opinion, explaining that "subsequent reflection has led us to conclude that our interpretation [of CAFA] was incorrect." Cappuccitti v. DirecTV, Inc., No. 09-14107 (11th Cir. Oct. 15, 2010). Instead, the court wrote that "CAFA's text does not require at least one plaintiff in a class action to meet the [$75,000] amount in controversy requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)."

The initial panel opinion in Cappuccitti had raised significant doubts over the availability of a federal forum for many class actions that were pending in courts within the Eleventh Circuit; the opinion on rehearing should eliminate those questions.

Learn more about our Consumer Litigation & Class Actions and Supreme Court & Appellate practices.

Visit us at www.mayerbrown.com.

The views expressed here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm or any of its clients.

Copyright 2010. Mayer Brown LLP, Mayer Brown International LLP, Mayer Brown JSM and/or Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. All rights reserved.

Mayer Brown is a global legal services organization comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the Mayer Brown Practices). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP, a limited liability partnership established in the United States; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership, and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.