In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Episode 18 | Unpacking the Packing: A Perspective on the Efforts to Expand the Supreme Court
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
Labcorp v. Davis brought a pivotal question to the fore: Can a court certify a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) that includes uninjured members? The case had the potential to significantly affect forum...more
On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court was set to rule in Labcorp v. Davis, which sought to resolve division among federal circuit courts regarding the certification of a damages class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of...more
This development reinforces the importance of early case assessment and a tailored class certification defense strategy. Lower courts may continue to diverge on this issue, creating inconsistent outcomes depending on...more
On April 29, 2025, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Labcorp v. Davis, in which it considered the question of whether Article III standing must be determined for all members of the class, including uninjured members,...more
In a closely watched case with major implications for class action litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court sidestepped a long-simmering legal question: Can a class be certified if it includes members who suffered no injury? On...more
In Labcorp v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court was poised to decide if a federal court can certify a class that includes members who lack any Article III injury. But as we discussed last month, the oral argument suggested that...more
In this age of mass manufacturing, each unit in a product line is usually the same as every other. But manufacturing isn’t perfect. Sometimes, for various reasons, some units in a product line will deviate from the...more
Colloquially known as the ‘‘Rocket Docket,’’ the Eastern District of Virginia (‘‘EDVA’’) has been the speediest federal court for civil trials since 2008, according to the annual data compiled by the Administrative Office of...more
While a war rages on the issue of standing in data breach cases, the need to prove damages is presenting an even greater hurdle for plaintiffs, as we have noted previously. One clear illustration of this trend is Attias v....more
The Fourth Circuit’s 2017 decision in Beck v. McDonald held that the mere fear of identity theft in the wake of a data breach was insufficient to confer Article III standing. ...more
We’ve already written about Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that all federal plaintiffs, even those alleging a statutory violation, must have suffered a real, concrete...more
The Ninth Circuit follows the Second and Seventh Circuits in dismissing consumer class actions in which named plaintiff alleges no injury other than statutory damages. Key Points: ..In Bassett v. ABM Parking Services,...more
The Northern District of Illinois recently waded into the conflict between standing and class certification when it held that a putative class representative must demonstrate standing to assert each claim before the motion...more