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

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Class Action Blogs

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

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: 7.4/day

Last Entry: April 17, 2013 at 06:30:00

Courts (At Least This One) Always Respect Pleadings Made In Good Faith

Mere Allegation Of 'Joint Liability' Does Not Satisfy 'Significant Basis' Test For Local Defendant

Posted on April 30, 2012
Opelousas General Hosp. Authority v. Fairpay Solutions, Inc., No. 11–30610,2011 WL 3902996 (5th Cir. La. Sept. 6, 2011). While reversing a district court's remand order under the local controversy exception, the Fifth Circuit held that the mere fact that relief might be sought against the local defendant for the conduct of others (via joint liability) does not convert the conduct of others into the conduct of the local defendant so as to satisfy the ‘significant basis' requirement...

The District Judge Continues To Play Bingo

Posted on April 27, 2012
Adams v. Macon County Greyhound Park, Inc., No. 3:11-CV-125-WKW [WO], 2011 WL 5294732 (M.D. Ala. Nov. 3, 2011). What a sexy claim!! Cry baby gamblers of bingo in ‘Bama. After being bright enough to lose their money playing electronic bingo (WTF? Electronic Bingo?? You can almost hear the mechanical voice holler B19, B19) they sue to get their lost money back asserting it is illegal to gamble...

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

This Mellon's Mine, Says A District Judge

Posted on April 26, 2012
Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Walnut Place LLC, No. 11 Civ. 5988 (WHP), 2011 WL 4953907 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 19, 2011). In this action, a federal court retained jurisdiction on a verified petition finding that the petitioner was not entitled to the securities exception under CAFA when its claim does not entirely depend on a mutual securities agreement, but rather requires other sources of law for its evaluation...

Plaintiff is the Master and Commander of Her Compaint and Can Limit the Amount in Controversy

Posted on April 25, 2012
McClendon v. Challenge Financial Investors Corp., No. 1:11 CV 1597, 2011 WL 5361069 (N.D. Ohio Nov. 3, 2011). While remanding the action to state court based on the plaintiff's disclaimer of an award greater than $5 million, a District Court in Ohio held that the plaintiff being master of her complaint can plead in good faith to avoid federal jurisdiction...

King Comeoniwannalayya Hooks Up With Resort Staff and Sends Their Case Back to Hawaiian State Court.

Posted on April 24, 2012
Smith v. Kawailoa Development, LLP, No. 11–00350 JMS, 2011 WL 4971165 (D. Haw. Oct. 19, 2011). Hawaii..land of beautiful beaches, lush jungles, seething volcanoes, and gypped food servers. A Magistrate Judge in Hawaii held that it cannot look beyond the complaint in deciding whether 'significant relief' was sought from a particular defendant and whether its conduct formed 'significant basis' for the plaintiffs' claims...

Lazy Defendants Lost The Second Chance

Posted on April 23, 2012
Moncada v. Petroleum Geo-Servs., No. 1:11–cv–1352 AWI JLT, 2011 WL 5101907 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2011). A District Court in California held that while calculating the value of the injunctive relief, the calculation should be limited to those employed at the time of filing the suit because the former employee class members do not possess standing to pursue injunctive relief as they would not benefit from the injunction...

The Badlands Give a Good Opinion for CAFA Jurisdiction

Posted on April 20, 2012
Calvillo v. Siouxland Urology Assocs. P.C., No. CIV. 09–4051–KES, 2011 WL 5155093 (D.S.D. Oct. 28, 2011). In this action a District Court in South Dakota held that denial of class certification is merely a change of a jurisdictional fact and such changes do not affect the continuation of jurisdiction under CAFA...

Case Gets Crated and Barreled Back to State Court: A Paper Filed In State Court Has More Weight Than One Filed In Federal Court At Least For Removal

Posted on April 19, 2012
Salmonson v. Euromarket Designs, Inc., No. CV 11–5179 PSG (PLAx), 2011 WL 4529396 (C.D. Cal. Sept. 28, 2011). Recently, a District Court in California held that only a paper filed in state court and not federal court opens § 1446(b)'s second thirty-day removal window...

All Representative Actions Are Not Removable Under CAFA

Posted on April 18, 2012
Stein v. American Express Travel Related Servs., No. 11–1384 (GK), 2011 WL 4430855 (D.D.C. Sept. 23, 2011). In this case, a District Court in District of Columbia, relying on Breakman v. AOL, L.L.C., 545 F.Supp.2d 96 (D.D.C.2008), held that CAFA does not establish an alternative basis for federal jurisdiction because the representative action under the D...

Mass Action Is Beyond The Mere 'Number Game'

Posted on April 17, 2012
Hammonds v. Monsanto Co., No. 4:11 CV 1660 DDN, 2011 WL 5554529 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 15, 2011). While remanding this action to state court, a District Court in Missouri held that a defendant cannot consolidate several smaller state court actions into one ‘mass action,' when plaintiff chose to structure her claims and remain outside of CAFA's grant of jurisdiction...

Linguistically Correct, Legally Incorrect!

Posted on April 16, 2012
Broyles v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., 10-854-JJB-SCR, 2011 WL 4737197 (M.D. La. Oct. 5, 2011). In this case, Louisiana federal court found that minimal diversity was established because the class definition and the allegations from the complaint indicated that a class likely consisted of members who were outside the state of Louisiana...

The World is Moving Fast!

Posted on April 13, 2012
Dicuio v. Brother Int'l Corp., 2011 WL 5557528 (D.N.J. Nov. 15, 2011). A District Court in New Jersey held that with the moving population and frequent relocations, citizenship for the purpose of the home state exception to CAFA cannot be determined based only on domicile...

"Judicial Estoppel" May Stop CAFA From Running (Like Warm Chocolate)

Posted on April 12, 2012
Rolwing v. Nestle Holdings, Inc., 666 F.3d 1069 (8th Cir. 2012). In this putative class action, the Eighth Circuit held that because Missouri's well-established judicial estoppel doctrine makes the plaintiff's stipulations of damages to less than CAFA's $5 million binding, remand was appropriate based on that disclaimer...

Amount In Controversy Signifies Entire Potential Recovery

Posted on April 11, 2012
Jones v. ADT Security Servs., Inc., 2012 WL 12744 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2012). While granting the motion to remand, a District Court in California held that 'amount in controversy,' denotes ‘entire potential recovery' of the class; thus, limiting the amount in controversy to less than $5 million establishes that the class does not seek an amount larger than that...

Plaintiff's Claim x Number Of Class Members = Amount In Controversy

Posted on April 10, 2012
Franklin v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2012 WL 10192 (S.D. Ohio Jan. 3, 2012). In this action, a District Court in Ohio held that it can calculate classwide damages by multiplying the estimated economic value of the plaintiff's claims by the number of class members who have claims typical to the plaintiff...

Human Resources Employees Implement Significant Policies BUT Still They Are Not Significant Defendants

Posted on April 09, 2012
Mazzucco v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 2011 WL 6936353 (D.N.J. Dec. 30, 2011) (district judge opinion). In this action, a District Court in New Jersey held that because a human resource employee cannot be held personally liable for implementing a work policy or procedure, he is not a significant defendant under the local controversy exception to CAFA...

Federal Courts have Sua Sponte Authority to Examine Subject Matter Jurisdiction

Posted on April 06, 2012
Servedio v. State Farm Ins. Co., 2011 WL 4373923 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2011). In this case, while deciding the defendant's motion to dismiss complaint, a District Court in New York first determined if it had CAFA jurisdiction under the principle that the federal courts have an independent obligation to consider the presence or absence of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte...

I Won't Play "Ping-Pong" For Gift Cards

Posted on April 04, 2012
Boundas v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., No. 10 C 4866, 2011 WL 5903495 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 21, 2011). Clothier who paid The Situation not to wear its clothes gets to stay in federal court for voiding its own gift cards. In this case, although the amount in controversy fell below CAFA's jurisdictional minimum after a District Court in California dismissed the complaint in part, it still retained the jurisdiction holding that a federal district court may not dispose of some claims on the merits, then dismiss the suit for lack of jurisdiction as the remaining claims fall short of the minimum amount in controversy...

"My client wanted to remove but the District Court said no, no, no. "Any defendant" does not mean "Any Defendant.""

Posted on April 03, 2012
Apex v. Contreras, No. CV 10-1382 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 2010). A District Court in California remanded the action to state court finding that use of the term, 'any defendant' in 28 U.S.C. § 1453(b) does not change the long standing rule that only original defendants can remove...

Can't Peep Outside If You Are Not Certain

Posted on April 02, 2012
Pittman v. Westgage Planet Hollywood Las Vegas, LLC, 2012 WL 254115 (D. Nev. Jan. 27, 2012). In this action, a District Court in Nevada held that the estimated class size and estimated recovery of a similar class action cannot be taken into consideration for determining the amount in controversy in absence of real class size or recovery...

Can't Peek Outside If You Are Not Certain

Class Action Lawsuits & Litigation Funding after the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

Posted on April 02, 2012
The CAFA Law Blog is delighted to bring to you today a post authored by Earl G. Boyle, a chief legal analyst for Counsel Financial, regarding litigation funding. *************************************************************************************************************** In an effort to reduce forum shopping and to curb class action lawsuit abuse, in 2005 Congress enacted The Class Action Fairness Act ("the Act")...

If "Knowledge is Power," then "Alleged Knowledge" is Jurisdiction: Southern District of Illinois Remands Case for Failure to Plead Jurisdictional Facts Based on "Personal Knowledge"

Posted on March 30, 2012
Pettett Funeral Home, Ltd. v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., No. 10-1000-GPM, 2010 WL 5463243 (S.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2010). Have you ever heard the old saw that 'it ain't what you know, but who you know?' In Pettett Funeral Home, the Southern District of Illinois took that a step further and held that, for CAFA jurisdictional purposes, it's 'who you say you know' – specifically, how many potential class members you say you know...

Virgin Mobile Stopped Ringing at California Courts

Posted on March 29, 2012
Heejn Lim v. Helio, LLC, 2012 WL 359304 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 2, 2012). In this action, a District Court in California held that under the 'preponderance of evidence' standard, it cannot require a stronger showing which would require a defendant to concede liability...

Voice of India Echoes in California

Posted on March 28, 2012
Pickman v. American Express Co., 2012 WL 258842 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2012) While concluding that it had subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiff's CLRA class action, a District Court in California held that under CLRA, a plaintiff cannot sue as an attorney general on behalf of the California people; instead the plaintiff should sue as a class member representing the class...

Home Owners Will Fight Their Document Fee Claims In Their Home State

Posted on March 27, 2012
Probola v. Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc., 2012 WL 194955 (D.N.J. Jan. 23, 2012). While remanding the action to the state court, a District Court in New Jersey held that the amount in controversy is not measured by the low end of an open-ended claim, but rather by a reasonable reading of the value of the rights being litigated...

A Worthless Claim That is Worth Over $5 Million Can Get You Into Federal Court

Posted on March 26, 2012
Marchione v. Pepsico, Inc., 2012 WL 140502 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2012). Not only did the plaintiffs bring a worthless claim, it satisfied the amount in controversy and kept this case in federal court. In this action, a District Court in Florida held that while determining the amount in controversy, the court can consider the claims requested in the response to interrogatories...

No (Wo)Man is an Island: Class Recovery Cannot Be Treated As Common Fund

Posted on March 23, 2012
Island v. The Guarantee Co. of N. America USA, No. 4:11CV00706 JLH, 2011 WL 6153694 (E.D. Ark. Dec. 12, 2011). In this action, a District Court in Arkansas held that the class recovery cannot be treated as 'common fund' because the plaintiffs in a class action do not share a joint interest in the entire amount to be recovered...

Previous | Next

Related Law Bulletins

The Grave Risk of Harm Defense in Hague Child Abduction Cases
A major debate is under way as to the future of the â��grave risk ...

Get Your H-1B Cases Ready Now To File On April 1 for October 1, 2007 Start Date
The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will begin a...

Czech procedure for Hague Convention international child abduction cases
International child abduction cases in the Czech Republic will be ...

German Failure to Expedite Hague Child Abduction Cases
It is our personal experience handling international child abducti...

Developments in Portland and Spokane Catholic Church Bankruptcy Cases
On April 17, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Elizabeth Perris formally appro...