Supreme Court to rule on whether CAFA applies to state attorneys general
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a case that will address whether the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) applies to class actions brought by state attorneys general.
May 29, 2013 at 08:15 AM
6 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a case that will address whether the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) applies to class actions brought by state attorneys general.
This specific case comes from the Mississippi attorney general, who accused several liquid crystal display (LCD) makers of price-fixing. The 5th Circuit in November 2012 agreed with the LCD makers that, under CAFA, the lawsuit should be removed to federal court.
CAFA gives federal courts jurisdiction over lawsuits with many plaintiffs, but thus far appeals courts have been split on whether that applies to class actions filed by state attorneys general. In fact, when Congress passed the statute in 2005, there was an amendment on the table to explicitly exclude class actions brought by state attorneys general from CAFA's scope, but the Senate rejected it.
According to Thomson Reuters, the case will pit state sovereignty against the Supreme Court's recent campaign against class actions. Cases such as Wal-Mart v. Dukes have shown that the high court is attempting to raise the bar for what makes class actions acceptable.
The Supreme Court will hear this case during the October 2013-June 2014 term.
Read more InsideCounsel coverage of class actions:
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to hear a case that will address whether the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) applies to class actions brought by state attorneys general.
This specific case comes from the Mississippi attorney general, who accused several liquid crystal display (LCD) makers of price-fixing. The 5th Circuit in November 2012 agreed with the LCD makers that, under CAFA, the lawsuit should be removed to federal court.
CAFA gives federal courts jurisdiction over lawsuits with many plaintiffs, but thus far appeals courts have been split on whether that applies to class actions filed by state attorneys general. In fact, when Congress passed the statute in 2005, there was an amendment on the table to explicitly exclude class actions brought by state attorneys general from CAFA's scope, but the Senate rejected it.
According to Thomson Reuters, the case will pit state sovereignty against the Supreme Court's recent campaign against class actions. Cases such as
The Supreme Court will hear this case during the October 2013-June 2014 term.
Read more InsideCounsel coverage of class actions:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250