California Class Actions: 2018 Update
- In our California Class Actions 2018 Update, we have outlined several key cases and trends that define the current class actions landscape. From “litigation tourism” to new definitions for unfair and fraudulent, we provide a rundown on the most-watched and influential recent cases. Please... ›
California Appellate Court Upholds Denial of Class Certification on Ascertainability Grounds
On December 4, 2017, a panel of the California Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed a trial court’s denial of class certification for alleged violations of California’s unfair competition, consumer protection, and false advertising laws. In so doing, the court upheld the lower court’s conclusions... ›Second Circuit Scraps District Court’s Denial of Uber’s Motion to Compel Arbitration
On August 17, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a district court’s denial of Uber’s and Mr. Travis Kalanick’s motions to compel arbitration in a case involving price-fixing accusations. In Meyer v. Kalanick , No. 16-2750 (2d Cir. Aug. 17, 2017), the... ›A Twist on Campbell-Ewald: Seventh Circuit Rejects Effort to Moot Class Action Claims Under F.R.C.P. 67
In Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez , 136 S. Ct. 663 (2016), the United States Supreme Court held that a defendant’s unaccepted offer of complete relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 did not moot a class plaintiff’s claim or require dismissal of the... ›- - Appellate & Supreme Court, Drug & Medical Device, Product Liability, Consumer Products, Class Action
Supreme Court Says “No” to “Litigation Tourism”
There has been a lot said already about the effect on product liability (especially drug) cases and “mass actions” as a result of the United States Supreme Court’s June 17, 2017 decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California , No. 16-466.... › Supreme Court Slams the Back Door Around Rule 23(f) in Microsoft v. Baker
By: Claudia M. Vetesi
Introduction. Yesterday, on June 12, 2017, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. Baker et al. , a closely watched case in the class action world, and one on which we previously reported here. Baker presented the following question: Can a... ›Ninth Circuit Revives Gerber Baby Food Class Action
By: Claudia M. Vetesi
Bruton v. Gerber, No. 15-15174. The district court had dismissed Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claim, denied class certification for lack of an “ascertainable class,” and granted summary judgment to Gerber because Plaintiff lacked evidence of deception. The Ninth Circuit reversed the rulings and remanded the... ›Closing the Door on Hybrid Product Defect/Fraud Claims
By: Erin M. Bosman and Julie Y. Park
On April 13, 2017, in Azoulai v. BMW of N. Am. LLC (Case No. 16-cv-00589), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed a proposed consumer fraud class action against BMW of North America LLC (BMW) concerning the soft-closing automatic doors... ›Speaking Engagement: False Advertising Class Actions – Practitioner’s Guide to Class Certification, Damages and Trial
By: Purvi G. Patel
On Wednesday, June 14, 2017 at 12:00 pm, Morrison & Foerster partner Purvi Patel will be presenting at The Bar Association of San Francisco (BASF) CLE program “False Advertising Class Actions – Practitioner’s Guide to Class Certification, Damages and Trial.” Ms. Patel and her... ›Court Dismisses Peeling Paint Class Action Against Hyundai, But Grants Third Opportunity to Amend
On April 13, 2017, United States District Judge Beverly Reid O’Connell for the Central District of California granted a motion to dismiss a class action complaint alleging that Hyundai sold cars with an alleged latent paint defect that caused the “self-healing” paint to bubble,... ›