In the recently published decision Mazza v. American Honda Motor Company, Inc., No. 09-55376 (9th Cir. 1-12-12), the Ninth Circuit reversed the certification of a nationwide class composed of consumers seeking relief under California’s consumer protection laws. In doing so, the court significantly decreased the viability of such nationwide classes, particularly when the plaintiff seeks to recover under any particular state’s consumer protection statutes.
Continue Reading The Ninth Circuit Applies the Brakes to Runaway Nationwide Class Actions
Eighth Circuit Denies Class Certification of UCL Cause of Action Despite Tobacco II’s Holding
In Avritt v. Reliastar Life Ins., __ F.3d__ (8th Circ. 8-12-2010), the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed an order denying class certification of a putative class of California annuity investors who were allegedly misled by the defendant. The opinion re-affirms the federal rules that require the plaintiff to show that it can prove reliance and damages on a class-wide basis before the court certifies a class while simultaneously limiting the persuasive authority of Tobacco II.
Continue Reading Eighth Circuit Denies Class Certification of UCL Cause of Action Despite Tobacco II’s Holding
Court of Appeal Affirms Multi-Million Dollar Settlement Despite Vigorous Objections
UPDATE: On July 28, 2010, the Court of Appeal, First District, modified and published the opinion in Cellphone Fee Termination Cases . The court retained its holdings regarding the adequacy of the class notice and the appropriate “incentive” payments to the class representatives. However, the court did not publish the portion of its opinion that analyzed the “fairness” of the class settlement, including the court’s recognition that the pending cross-complaint filed by Verizon against the class that could have reduced the class’s overall damage award. The rest of the opinion remains the same and can now be relied upon as authority supporting similar class-notice and incentive payment settlement plans.
On June 28, 2010, in the unpublished opinion Cellphone Fee Termination Cases, A124038 (June 28, 2010), the Court of Appeal, First District, affirmed the trial court’s approval of a nationwide class action settlement over the objections of several class members. Although it is not published, the Cellphone Fee case provides guidance for litigants seeking to secure approval of class-wide settlements. It also suggests effective litigation strategy that will help class action parties “win” the settlement against asserted objections.Continue Reading Court of Appeal Affirms Multi-Million Dollar Settlement Despite Vigorous Objections
Pfizer: The Court of Appeal Rinses Away the Tobacco II Aftertaste
In Pfizer, Inc. v. Superior Court, ___ Cal. App. 4th __ (March 2, 2010), the Court of Appeal, Second District, applied In re Tobacco II Cases, 46 Cal. 4th 298 (2009) (“Tobacco II“) to overturn an order granting class certification. The Pfizer opinion resuscitates traditional class certification opposition strategies based on the unfair competition law (the “UCL”) even in the wake of Tobacco II‘s holding.
Continue Reading Pfizer: The Court of Appeal Rinses Away the Tobacco II Aftertaste
Tenth Circuit Reaffirms That a Case Terminates When the Class Representative’s Claims Become Moot Before Class Certification
In Clark v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Nos. 07-1454, 07-1466, the Tenth Circuit affirmed a district court’s order denying class certification because it lost jurisdiction when the representative plaintiff’s claims became moot. Clark shows how a defendant’s request for a merits determination before class certification was rewarded when the resulting decision mooted the named plaintiff’s claim and defeated class certification.
Continue Reading Tenth Circuit Reaffirms That a Case Terminates When the Class Representative’s Claims Become Moot Before Class Certification
California Court of Appeal Affirms Denial of Class Certification Based On Presence of Individual Issues While Rejecting Plaintiff’s Argument Based on Tobacco II
In In re Vioxx Class Cases, (2009) __ Cal. App. 4th __, the trial court denied class certification after the defendant, Merck & Co., Inc. effectively showed that the plaintiff’s theory of the case was grossly simplified. By introducing copious evidence showing the numerous factors that may relate to each class member’s reliance and damages, Merck avoided class certification even in the face of its allegedly pervasive and misleading advertising campaign. The plaintiffs appealed, arguing that the California Supreme Court’s decision in In re Tobacco II Cases, (2009) 46 Cal. 4th 298, undermined the trial court’s rationale. The Court of Appeal, Second District, affirmed the trial court’s denial of class certification.
Continue Reading California Court of Appeal Affirms Denial of Class Certification Based On Presence of Individual Issues While Rejecting Plaintiff’s Argument Based on Tobacco II