On May 15, 2017, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied class treatment to a proposed class action alleging violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In its opinion, the district court held that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement because their “omission” claims were actually alleged misrepresentations not subject to a presumption of class-wide reliance. Continue reading “Plaintiffs’ Securities Claims Denied Class Treatment for Failure to Satisfy Predominance Requirement”
This decision is more than merely an appellate adjudication of a TCPA case. It’s an announcement of class certification law by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Here’s the court’s summary: Continue reading “Sixth Circuit Reverses Defendant’s TCPA Class Action Win”
Four independent auto body shops sued Progressive Casualty Insurance Company in state court in Cleveland. Their gripe? They claimed that they repaired Progressive-covered vehicles but that Progressive tortiously interfered with their relationships with their customers “by dictating what services and parts” Progressive was “willing to pay for” when the body shops were “tasked with repairing” a covered vehicle. They also complained that Progressive improperly “dictate[d] the labor rates” it was willing to pay the body shops “without regard to a particular shop’s rates.” “[T]hese limitations,” plaintiffs contended, did “not necessarily allow for them to restore an insured’s car to its original, pre-loss condition,” which they alleged violated both Ohio law and Progressive’s own insurance policies. Continue reading “Ohio Appeals Court Dents Plaintiffs’ Class Certification Motion”