The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently upheld the dismissal of a putative class action challenging an advertised discount as supposedly deceptive. In so ruling, the Eighth Circuit held that the named plaintiff's allegations failed to meet the "ascertainable loss" requirement under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act.
Posts tagged as “CAFA”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that a putative class action removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act lacked federal jurisdiction because it fell within CAFA’s "internal-affairs" and "home-state controversy" exceptions.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently reversed a trial court's approval of a settlement in a class action case because the trial court presumed the fairness, adequacy, and reasonableness of the proposed settlement on the grounds the settlement was negotiated to at arm's-length failed to assess the fairness, adequacy, and reasonableness of the agreed to attorneys’ fees and incentive payment, and erred in determining the class relief did not constitute "coupons" under the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that it could sua sponte question a defendant’s assertions of jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act, and that the record did not sufficiently demonstrate that CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement was met here because the requisite $5 million amount was not evident from the face of the complaint nor the defendant’s notice of removal and supporting declaration.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the total amount of money received from a challenged practice can be used to satisfy the federal Class Action Fairness Act’s jurisdictional requirement of $5 million in controversy.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently reversed a trial court’s contrary ruling in a putative class action relating to a data breach and remanded the case back to state court for lack of Article III standing.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently vacated a trial court’s order remanding a defendant's removal to federal court of a putative class action under the federal Class Action Fairness Act. In so ruling, the Eighth Circuit held that CAFA did not contain a presumption that class action cases should be remanded to state court, and the trial court failed to properly consider a declaration provided by the defendant in support of the request for removal under CAFA.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently rejected several challenges to an attorney's fee award in connection with a class action settlement.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed a trial court’s ruling remanding the case to state court based on the federal Class Action Fairness Act’s “local controversy” exception, finding the trial court erroneously applied the exception.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed the denial of a motion to remand to state court a putative class action removed to federal court under the federal Class Action Fairness Act.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a trial court erred in its amount in controversy analysis in determining jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that it did not have jurisdiction to consider a defendant’s motion for leave to appeal in a case that was previously removed to federal court pursuant to the federal Class Action Fairness Act after the federal trial court sua sponte remanded the case back to state court.