Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Class Actions”

9th Cir. Holds Anti-Joinder and Class Action Waiver Provisions Did Not Violate California Law

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed an order compelling arbitration, even though the arbitration clause contained a class action waiver and an anti-joinder provision, and dismissing a putative class action brought against the operator of a smartphone app offering financial services to its customers.

7th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of Two FDCPA Class Action Cases on Spokeo/Standing Grounds

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of consumers’ claims that a collection letter used false, deceptive, or misleading representations, or otherwise unfair or unconscionable methods to collect a debt, in supposed violation of sections 1692e and 1692f of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).

7th Cir. Holds Mere Overstatement of Amount of Debt Not Enough for Spokeo Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently vacated a trial court’s order denying a debt collector’s motion to compel arbitration in a putative class action lawsuit filed by a consumer alleging violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and remanded the case to the lower court with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

9th Cir. Upholds Denial of Class Cert. in ‘Wage and Hour’ Case Against Bank

In a putative class action against a bank for alleged underpayment of overtime wages, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held the use of a potentially improper pay structure was not evidence of harm in every instance, and thus the predominance requirement provided for in Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 23(b)(3) necessary to certify a class action was not met.

9th Cir. Holds Settlement Classes Generally Do Not Require Choice-Of-Law Analyses

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that it is generally not legal error for a trial court to hold that a settlement class satisfies class action predominance requirements, particularly for a class asserting a unifying federal claim, without first performing a choice-of-law analysis.

9th Cir. Holds ‘Reasonably Possible’ Punitive Damages Award Supports CAFA Removal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a defendant that relies on potential punitive damages to satisfy the amount in controversy for removal under the federal Class Action Fairness Act meets that requirement if it shows that the proffered punitive/compensatory damages ratio is reasonably possible.