Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
78 results for '* topic:"Class Actions"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2021-10-11
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Education | Health Care
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Restrepo
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1170
Defendant appealed the "issue" class certification of plaintiffs' negligent infliction of emotional distress action and court found district court failed to determine whether the proposed issues satisfied a subsection of rule 23(b) and failed to properly analyze several of the Gates v. Rohm & Haas, 655, F3d 255, factors. Vacated.
Publication Date: 2021-09-20
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Kenney
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-1085
Plaintiff moved for class certification in his action asserting an unlawful RICO scheme between companies who purchased future settlement annuity payments and an attorney to obtain annuities from unsophisticated annuitants on unfair terms and court found plaintiff could not satisfy each requirement of rule 23. Motion denied.
Publication Date: 2021-07-12
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Automotive | Retail
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Lycoming County
Judge: Judge Tira
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0656
The court overruled a preliminary objection regarding arbitration, because the agreement that was the subject of this dispute did not contain an arbitration clause.
Publication Date: 2021-03-22
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Health Care | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Kearney
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0297
Consistent with decisions rendered after Langbecker v. Electric Data Systems Corp., the district court held that the potential applicability of an Employee Retirement Income Security Act §404(c) defense did not defeat commonality or typicality in this class action brought by disgruntled members of a defined contribution plan. The court granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
Publication Date: 2021-02-08
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: State and Local Government
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Robreno
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 21-0137
Court approved a motion for approval of class certification and consent decree, as modified, in plaintiffs' class action challenging city's forfeiture policies and proceedings as violating constitutional guarantees of due process because plaintiffs met the Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153, In re Prudential,148 F.3d, 383, and rule 23 factors for class certification and fair settlement. Motion granted.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2020-12-16
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Greenberg
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Peter B. Andrews, David M. Sborz, Craig J. Springer, Andrews & Springer, Greenville, DE; Randall Baron, Joseph D. Daley, David T. Wissbroecker, Robbins Geller Rudman & Down, San Diego, CA; Christopher H. Lyons, Robbins Geller Rudman & Down, Nashville, TN for plaintiff.
for defendant: Deborah S. Birnback, Jennifer B. Luz, Goodwin Procter, Boston, MA; David John Teklits, Morris Nichols Arsht & Tunnell, Wilmington, DE for defendant Cowan. Anne S. Gaza, Elena C. Norman, Robert M. Vrana, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, Wilmington, DE for defendant LBT Merger Sub, Inc. Adam T. Humann, Kevin R. Powell, II, Kirkland Ellis, Washington, DC; Joshua Z. Rabinovitz, Kirkland Ellis, Chicago, IL for HIG Capital and Lionbridge Tech., Inc.
Case Number: D69226
Plaintiff in this class action suit failed to demonstrate the existence of a material misrepresentation, so the court affirmed the judgment in favor of defendants.
Publication Date: 2020-11-16
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Food and Beverage | Insurance
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Padova
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-1250
Plaintiff restaurant moved for judgment on the pleadings in its putative class action concerning policy coverage for damages from COVID-19 government-ordered closings and court found the motion implicated the rule against one-way intervention. Motion dismissed.
Publication Date: 2020-10-19
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Retail
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Brody
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-1138
Court approved supplemental notices in collective actions directing unrepresented opt-in class members to hire class counsel or their own attorney or proceed with a separate independent action, due to the large numbers of pro se class members who failed to participate in proceedings, unreasonably delaying progress of the actions. Plaintiff's motion for supplemental notice granted.
Publication Date: 2020-08-03
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Insurance
Court: U.S. District Court for Pennsylvania - Eastern
Judge: District Judge Pappert
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0826
Court considered the settlement in plaintiffs' class action, concerning insurer's breach of contract and bad faith over rot damage for which plaintiffs had paid coverage premiums, and certified the class and found the settlement was fair, reasonable and adequate, treated class members equitably and approved the settlement. Motions granted.
Publication Date: 2020-08-03
Practice Area: Class Actions
Industry: Health Care | Non-Profit
Court: Courts of Common Pleas, Montgomery County
Judge: Judge Rogers
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 20-0719
The trial court did not err with respect to the entry of judgment in this class action suit involving employee benefits, and plaintiffs were not entitled to a new trial.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read