.

Google       

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402


Class Action

CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

The CAFA Law Blog is an online resource for information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, or “CAFA.”

Post Frequency: 3.5/day

Last Entry: August 19, 2014 at 06:00:02

Recent Entries: 815

Track this blog ()

Go to CAFA Law Blog - Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, find other Class Action blogs, or browse all law blogs.

Search
This Blog Only All Blogs

Posts

Fifth Circuit Grants Petition to Determine The Meaning Of ?Significant Relief? Under CAFA

Posted on December 19, 2013
Opelousas General Trust Authority v. Multiplan, Inc., 2013 WL 3245169 (5th Cir. June 28, 2013). Because it had yet to fully explore the meaning of ?significant relief? in the context of CAFA?s local controversy exception, the Fifth Circuit granted the defendants? petition for leave to appeal a remand order to consider the question...


California District Court Avoids Addressing Controlling Standard for Determining Amount in Controversy

Posted on December 18, 2013
Ornelas v. Children?s Place Retail Stores, Inc., 2013 WL 2468388 (C.D.Cal. June 5, 2013). A District Court in California avoided addressing the effect of a recent Ninth Circuit decision on the controlling standard for determining the amount in controversy in a removed case where Plaintiff has pled less than the jurisdictional amount...


Supplemental Evidence from Removing Defendant May Be Considered To Defeat CAFA Removal

Posted on December 17, 2013
Steele v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., 2013 WL 2481476 (S.D. Cal. June 10, 2013). Removing defendants can undermine the basis for removal jurisdiction with their own subsequent submissions. A District Court in Southern California held that a court may consider supplemental evidence proffered by the removing defendant, which was not originally included in the removal notice [...


Defendant Cannot Be Asked To Confess Liability Under The Guise Of Calculating The Amount In Controversy

Posted on December 16, 2013
Raskas v. Johnson & Johnson, 2013 WL 3198177 (8th Cir. June 26, 2013) While reversing an order of remand, the Eighth Circuit held that when determining the amount in controversy, the question is not whether the damages are greater than the requisite amount, but whether a fact finder might legally conclude that they are...


To access this complete feed in the blog feed reader login or register for free.

The Seventh Circuit Resolves District Court Split Over Triggering the 30-day Removal Period

Posted on November 25, 2013
Walker v. Trailer Transit, Inc., 2013 WL 4488915 (7th Cir. Aug. 23, 2013). The Seventh Circuit resolves a district court split in the Seventh Circuit holding that the 30-day removal clock under 28 U.S.C. 1446(b)(3) is triggered only when the defendant receives a pleading or other paper that affirmatively and unambiguously reveals that the [...


A Defendant's Subjective Belief Does Not Trigger Removal

Posted on April 17, 2013
Roth v. CHA Hollywood Medical Center, L.P., 2012 WL 5456406 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2012). A District Court in California, addressing a motion to remand, was left with serious doubts as to the propriety of the removal because the defendants at no time referenced any 'paper' that they had received that allowed them to first ascertain that the case has become removable...


Individual Claims Removed Along with Class Claims Retain CAFA Jurisdiction Independent of Any Subsequent Dismissal or Transfer of Class Claims

Posted on April 16, 2013
Ellison v. Autozone, Inc., 2012 WL 5177478 (9th Cir. Oct. 19, 2012). In this racial discrimination and state wage laws violation action, the Ninth Circuit reiterated that the federal courts are not deprived of jurisdiction over individual claims through a subsequent dismissal or transfer of class claims when jurisdiction was proper at the time of removal...


If A Defendant Could Be Found Liable For The Plaintiff's Claims, Then He Is A Proper Defendant

Posted on April 15, 2013
Velasquez v. HMS Host USA, Inc., 2012 WL 6049608 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2012).   A District Court in California held that, if one could be found liable for civil penalties under the law asserted by the plaintiffs, then he is a proper defendant to the action and not joined fraudulently to defeat diversity jurisdiction...


The Real Story From the Unanimous Decision in Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles

Posted on April 12, 2013
Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, 11-1450, 2013 WL 1104735 (U.S. Mar. 19, 2013). While we are not surprised by the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in Knowles issued on March 19, 2013, we do find it interesting that most commentators on this case have missed what we think is the real story from the decision...


Trouble in Paradise? Emissions Of Hazardous Materials Has An Impact On CAFA Mass Action Jurisdiction As Well

Posted on April 09, 2013
Abraham v. St. Croix Renaissance Group, L.L.L.P., 2012 WL 60998502 (D.V.I. Dec. 7, 2012).   I've got 2 tickets to Paradise. Won't you pack your bags, we'll leave tonight! Well, if Paradise is St. Croix, then Eddie Money may want to read this case before going...


Controversies Are Not "Not Local" When The Defendants Are Vulnerable To Similar Claims in Other States

Posted on April 08, 2013
Villalpando v. Exel Direct Inc., 2012 WL 5464620 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2012). In a class action based on the alleged misclassification of drivers as independent contractors rather than employees, the Northern District Court of California held that the controversy was 'not local,' and it denied remand on the basis that the defendants engaged in conduct that could have injured consumers across the country making them vulnerable to similar claims in other states...


Defendants Cannot Ask the Court to Bushwhack but, Instead, May Blaze A More Enticing, Interpretive Trail Inviting the Court to Take the Road Less Traveled.

Posted on March 25, 2013
MyinfoGuard, LLC v. Sorrell, 2012 WL 5469913 (D. Vt. Nov. 9, 2012). Although the enactment of CAFA was meant to expand federal court jurisdiction over class actions, the Vermont district court did not deviate from the traditional 'whole complaint'/ wholesale approach analysis when evaluating whether the State is the real party in interest in this parens patriae action...


Extra! Extra! Read All About It! Get the Scoop on the First CAFA Supreme Court Case

Posted on January 15, 2013
Well, it took a few years, but the U.S. Supreme Court finally took a CAFA case:  Standard Insurance Co. v. Knowles.  As our brilliant readers already know, the Class Action Fairness Act has generated extensive litigation on damages stipulations since its 2005 enactment, but the law remains unsettled...


If the Burden is on you to Prove the Amount in Controversy, be Sure to Check your Math!

Posted on November 01, 2012
Kim v. Mosaic Sales Solutions Holding Co., No. 2:10-cv-03186-MCE-GGH, 2011 WL 775895 (E.D. Cal. Feb. 28, 2011).  As lawyers, sometimes we are not the best number crunchers. After all, many of us pursued degrees in Political Science because there was very little math required...


Guest Post: How the Class Action Fairness Act has Impacted Federal Courts

Posted on October 18, 2012
Here is our second guest post for the day.  This one is from Kevin Krist, a personal injury attorney located in Houston.   **************************************** The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 was designed mainly to curtail abuses that class action lawsuits often made on the justice system...


Guest Post: Happy Birthday CAFA: Has It Improved the Federal Court System?

Posted on October 18, 2012
The CAFA Law Blog is pleased to publish another guest post.  This one is from Sarah Rawson.  Sarah, you have the floor.... ******************************************************* The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 increased federal control of class action lawsuits...


Continuing Jurisdiction - You Can't Always Get what you Want, or what you Need....

Posted on October 08, 2012
Taragan v. Nissan N. Am., Inc., No: C 09-03660 SBA, 2011 WL 941132 (N.D. Cal. March 16, 2011).   After dismissal of class claims, it seems that both parties wanted to stay in federal court to decide the claims of the individual plaintiffs, but you can't always get what you want, or even what you need...


"No, You Just Thought You Were a Defendant," the Sixth Circuit Tells MERS

Posted on October 02, 2012
In Re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., 680 F.3d 849 (6th Cir. 2012). Here, the plaintiff, Kathy Hanson, obtained a loan from America's Wholesale Lender to purchase real property, and signed a mortgage with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) as the beneficial holder...


You Know That Award for Most Boring Case Ever Written? Yeah, We Have a Winner.

Posted on October 01, 2012
BlackRock Fin. Mgmt. Inc. v. Segregated Account of AMBAC Assur., 673 F.3d 169 (2d Cir. 2012). Here is a rare appellate snoozer that we have boiled down for you. The Bank of New York Mellon (BoNY), acting in its capacity as trustee of trusts established to hold residential mortgage-backed securities, settled claims that the originator and servicer had breached obligations owed to the trusts...


The First Circuit Rules That Federal Law Has Its Limits - Who Knew?

Posted on September 24, 2012
In Re: Volkswagen and Audi Warranty, 2012 WL 3064844 (1st Cir. July 27, 2012). Plaintiffs nationwide sought to bring claims on behalf of all persons or entities in the United States who were current or former owners of several particular vehicles, alleging that the engines were defectively designed and that the defendants concealed the defects...


Guest Post: The Class Action Fairness Act's Impact Internationally

Posted on September 03, 2012
The CAFA Law Blog is pleased to post another guest post.  This post is from Daniela Levett for Pryers Solicitors.  Daniela, you have the mike.... ***************************************************************** It has been seven years since President George W...


Guest Post: The Impact of the Class Fairness Act

Posted on August 27, 2012
Today, we are pleased to publish a Guest Post written by Paul Kasparov on behalf of MayoWynneBaxter.co.uk – specialist Wills and Probate Solicitors.   Paul, you have the floor. *********************************************************** Legislating litigation is one of the most politicized and unpredictable functions undertaken by the United States government...


Plaintiff's Jurisdictional Allegations Were Cemented at the Time of Removal

Posted on July 13, 2012
Hardig v. Certainteed Corp., 2012 WL 423512 (W.D.N.C. Feb. 9, 2012). The Western District of North Carolina held that a class complaint is cemented at the time of removal and that jurisdiction can't be undone through 'post hoc characterization.' The plaintiffs brought a class action in the Superior Court of Union County, North Carolina, alleging breach of warranty and violations of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act...


99 Problems (But a "Mass Action" Ain't One)

Posted on July 12, 2012
Nevada v. Bank of America Corp., et al, 2012 WL 688552 (9th Cir. March 2, 2012).  Nevada AG's parens patriae suit fell 99 persons short of a 100 person 'mass action' under CAFA and was remanded back to state court. Nevada's Attorney General filed suit on behalf of all Nevada consumers (a parens patriae suit) alleging that the defendants, a group of mortgage lenders and servicers, misled Nevada consumers about the terms and operation of their home mortgage modification and foreclosure processes, in violation of the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices Act ('DTPA')...


Guest Post: Beyond The Class Action Fairness Act

Posted on June 08, 2012
Today we are publishing a guest post contributed by Sandy Atwood, on behalf of Lawyers.com. Sandy studies corporate law and in her spare time, she takes an interest in and writes about the various acts that are passed by Congress.  The floor is yours, Sandy...


Thorogood Tried 1 Bourbon, 1 Scotch, 1 Beer, and Got Slammed

Posted on May 11, 2012
Thorogood v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., No. 10-2407, 2010 WL 4286367 (7th Cir. (Ill.) Nov. 02, 2010). Wanna tell you a story, About the house-man blues This story of house-main blues is about a dryer instead of being able to pay the rent. The plaintiff, Steven Thorogood (Editors' Note: we have no idea if he is related to George, but wouldn't that be cool?), a buyer, brought a class action against the defendant, a seller of dryers and all sorts of other stuff, alleging that the defendant deceptively advertised that its dryer had stainless steel drums whereas part of the drum was made of ceramic-coated mild steel in violation of the consumer laws of 28 states...


This Subprime Bubble Will Burst in State Court

Posted on May 10, 2012
Mireles v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al, 2012 WL 84723 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012). In an action brought by borrowers alleging fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation against national banks, a district court remanded the case to state court, finding that the defendants primarily failed to meet their burden to establish that this was a mass action under CAFA...


Amend a Complaint to Add a Few Billion Dollars and a Few Thousand Plaintiffs and, Voila!, a Defendant's Right to Remove is Revived (Say that last part five times fast).

Posted on May 09, 2012
MG Building Materials, Ltd. v. Paychex, Inc., 2012 WL 201725 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2012). A district court in New York retained jurisdiction over an action, finding that when an amended complaint alters the very nature of a suit and virtually makes it a 'new action,' the defendant's right to remove is 'revived...


State of South Carolina has a Real Interest in Making Sure its Citizens TV Viewing is Not Hampered by Price Fixing

Posted on May 08, 2012
South Carolina v. LG Display Co., Ltd., No. 3:11–cv–00729–JFA, 2011 WL 4344074 (D.S.C. Sept. 14, 2011) and South Carolina v. AU Optronics Corp., No. 3:11-cv-00731-JFA, 2011 WL 4344079 (D.S.C. Sept. 14, 2011). A District Court in South Carolina held that under a parens patriae action (that is a fancy law school word for a lawsuit brought by the state on behalf of its citizens), the State has a quasi-sovereign interest in bringing an action to enforce its laws and disgorge the proceeds of ill-gotten gains on behalf of its citizens who fell victim to TV picture price fixing...


Attorney Apparently Fails to Learn how to Discern Advertising Bullsh*! in Law School

Posted on May 07, 2012
Bank v. Hydra Group, LLC, No. 10–4085–cv., 2011 WL 4494380 (2d Cir. Sept. 29, 2011). A California attorney, brought a putative class action against Hydra Group LLC, claiming that it sent him and others unsolicited commercial e-mail advertisements in violation of § 17529...


Previous | Next
Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Bulletins

Related Law Articles

is===1
Related Law Questions
Related Searches
















US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!










is===1


4.0644 secs