The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed summary judgment against a putative class of borrowers who were allegedly victims of a captive reinsurance scheme by a lender and its affiliated reinsurance company. In so ruling, the Court held that the plaintiff borrowers’ claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations, and the doctrine of equitable tolling did not apply because the plaintiff borrowers had not exercised reasonable diligence in investigating their potential claims. A copy of the opinion in Judith Cunningham v. M&T Bank Corp. is available at: Link to Opinion. The plaintiff borrowers financed the purchase…
Posts tagged as “Class Actions”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s order denying class certification in a lawsuit alleging violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), holding that the “district court did not abuse its discretion by finding the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3) unsatisfied,” and that the “district court appropriately determined that it would be extremely difficult to ascertain the identities of the individuals who had not consented to receive the messages.” A copy of the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Gannon v. Network Telephone Services, Inc. is available at: Link to Opinion. A copy of the…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently refused to impose a heightened “ascertainability” requirement at class certification. More specifically, the Court held that plaintiffs do not have to prove at the class certification stage that there is a “reliable and administratively feasible” way to identify class members under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), and affirmed the district court’s certification of a class of consumers who purchased a dietary supplement falsely advertised as scientifically tested and proven to relieve joint pain. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The putative class plaintiff sued…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the district court abused its discretion in denying a plaintiff’s motion to certify a class of home buyers alleging that a scheme involving a title insurer buying minority interests in title agencies in exchange for referral of future title insurance business violated the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), affirming in part, vacating in part and remanding for further proceedings. In so ruling, the Court held that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s position in its amicus brief was not entitled to Chevron deference, because the CFPB was…