2nd Circuit Remands Flushable Wipes Class Cert Over Predominance Questions
The appellate panel said the record before it was incomplete, requiring U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein to hold additional fact-finding hearings.
May 14, 2019 at 02:35 PM
3 minute read
A pair of class actions brought against two manufacturers and bulk retailer Costco Wholesale Corp. over claims “flushable wipes” aren't so flushable were remanded back to the district court Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
The appellate panel of Circuit Judges Guido Calabresi, Debra Ann Livingston and Raymond Lohier Jr. said the appeal by manufacturers Procter & Gamble and Kimberly-Clark, and Costco required more work by U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein of the Eastern District of New York.
In March 2017, Weinstein certified class status in two suits before him that survived the court's review process, Kurtz v. Kimberly-Clark and Belfiore v. Procter & Gamble. The plaintiffs in each suit alleged the product claims of a flushable toilet wipe—purchased at a premium—were false. In fact, they claimed, the wipes ended up clogging plumbing.
On appeal, the companies argued that the plaintiffs failed to overcome elements of the Rule 23(b) test. Specifically, the defendants argued the district court erred in giving the plaintiffs a pass on the predominance requirement. They argued the plaintiffs failed to prove that common issues will predominate over the individual members of the class, as they were able to provide “common proof” of injuries and causation.
The defendants pointed to the plaintiff's expert—Colin Weir, vice president at a research and consulting firm—and his testimony regarding a so-called hedonic regression analysis. The defendants claim Weir's analysis alleges, but does not demonstrate, class members paid a premium for the benefit of the allegedly flushable toilet products.
The problem, for the appellate panel, was that the record simply didn't provide enough information to make a decision. The cases were remanded back to Weinstein for “further development of the record.”
In particular, the panel noted, it sought further factual development over its “specific concern with the plaintiffs' proof that they can establish the injury and causation elements of their claims at trial with common evidence.” After further review, the district court was asked to choose “whether to decertify the damages classes or maintain the current certification orders.”
Kurtz was represented on appeal by Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd partner Douglas Wilens. Belfiore was presented by Wolf Popper chairman emeritus Lester Levy. Neither responded to requests for comment.
Costco's appellate legal team was led by Morrison & Foerster partner Brian Matsui. P&G was represented by Covington & Burling partner Mark Mosier and his team. Neither of the appellants' counsel responded to a request for comment.
Sidley Austin partner Eamon Joyce headed up Kimberly-Clark's appellate team. He declined to comment.
Related:
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 AllMore Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
Lululemon Faces Legal Fire Over Its DEI Program After Bias Complaints Surface
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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