Resolving an issue of first impression before it, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) “may not be used to evade the specific numerosity requirement”...more
7/31/2020
/ Automotive Industry ,
Breach of Warranty ,
CAFA ,
Class Action ,
Class Representatives ,
Diversity Jurisdiction ,
Express Warranty ,
Fee-Shifting ,
Implied Warranties ,
Magnuson-Moss Act ,
Manufacturing Defects ,
Putative Class Actions ,
State Law Claims ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Following last month's dismissal in Preston v. American Honda Motor Company, No. 18-cv-00038 (C.D. Cal. May 24, 2018), a California federal judge on Monday dismissed yet another putative class action, Heber v. Toyota Motor...more
In a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, the Court of Appeals held that unnamed, putative class members are not required to establish standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Rather, the Court held that...more
7/27/2015
/ Antitrust Litigation ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Class Action ,
Comcast ,
Comcast v. Behrend ,
Design Defects ,
FRCP 23(b)(3) ,
Prudential Insurance ,
Putative Class Actions ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Tyson Foods ,
Tyson Foods v Bouaphakeo ,
Volvo