Jonathan Selbin Comments on DOJ Claims About Abusive Consumer Class Actions

Jonathan Selbin Comments on DOJ Claims About Abusive Consumer Class Actions

In Ohio federal court lawyers for the U.S. Department of Justice are seeking to reverse a proposed class action settlement that would give consumers $72.50 coupons for defective pressure cookers that allegedly cause scalding hot contents to erupt, in some cases causing users to suffer from second and third degree burns. [Read more…]

Daniel Hutchinson to Speak at 2019 Impact Fund Class Action Conference in San Francisco

Daniel Hutchinson to Speak at 2019 Impact Fund Class Action Conference

Lieff Cabraser partner Daniel Hutchinson will be speaking on Friday February 22nd at the Impact Fund’s 2019 Class Action Conference in San Francisco as part of a panel discussion on the current state of ascertainability, “Ascertainability isn’t a thing. Or is it?” As the conference describes it, “complex litigation experts will discuss the current state of ascertainability in federal and California courts, how to manage class actions to head off ascertainability arguments, and strategies for responding when they inevitably show up in court.” [Read more…]

Jonathan Selbin on the Future of Class Actions in Bloomberg Law

Jonathan Selbin on the Future of Class Actions in Bloomberg Law

The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court on jurisdictional limits to lawsuits may have a significant impact on the size and location of class action lawsuits

Bloomberg News is wrapping up 2017 with an examination of the future of class action law in light of Bristol-Myers Squibb v. Superior Court (“BMS”), a case focusing on jurisdictional limits on cases against corporations. “It’s too early to tell how the courts will apply BMS to class actions, but class action litigators are preparing to go to war over where class suits, particularly nationwide suits, can now be filed.” With overweening corporations as the target of most class suits, it seems clear the defense bar will push for a reduction in the scope and size of aggregate actions via what they see as BMS’s proscription of expanded jurisdiction, while plaintiffs will seek to convince courts that BMS is inapposite and should not be held to constrict use of the class action mechanism to obtain judgments for the fraudulent misconduct of the corporate world. [Read more…]

Federal Court Authorizes Class Actions to Assure Fairness for Veterans’ Claims

Federal Court Authorizes Class Actions to Assure Fairness for Veterans' Claims

April 26, 2017–(Washington, DC)–In the summer of 2016, Lieff Cabraser filed an amicus brief on behalf of Administrative Law Professors and Complex Litigation Law Professors in Monk v. Shulkin in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in support of Conley F. Monk, Jr.’s petition to certify a class action over the claims of thousands of veterans whose benefits claims had been delayed or denied. Citing in part that amicus brief, on April 26, 2017, the Court issued a precedential opinion holding, for the first time, that the Veterans Courts have authority to certify classes in the absence of an express Rule 23 or similar device to promote efficiency and fairness. [Read more…]