Davis v. Capital One, N.A., No. 24-1507, 2025 WL 2445880 (4th Cir. Aug. 25, 2025). Background. Defendant made prerecorded calls to Plaintiff, a non-customer, attempting to reach a customer that had provided consent...more
In Cody v. City of St. Louis, 103 F.4th 523 (8th Cir. 2024), the Eight Circuit maintained its position that admissibility standards do not apply strictly at the class certification stage, thereby solidifying a circuit split...more
Class certification is the feature fight of any putative class action lawsuit. If granted, it can multiply the stakes of a case several hundred- or thousand-fold. If denied, it can signal the end of the litigation. Because of...more
Key Points - The en banc 9th Circuit clarified numerous rules applicable to class actions brought under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court’s watershed decision in Olean Wholesale Grocery v....more
At Class Certification Stage, Non-Expert Evidence Must Be Reliable, but Not Necessarily Admissible: As the Supreme Court explained 40 years ago in General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 161 (1982),...more
Certifying an antitrust class under Rule 23 has become a battle. In the last 20 years, courts have been changing the game around Rule 23 interpretation, and rigorous analysis at class certification has made briefing...more
It is fitting that the day after Halloween the Ninth Circuit issued its denial of rehearing en banc in Sali v. Corona Regional Medical Center, Case No. 15-56460, because the issue it raises, like Michael Myers in the...more