Expert testimony plays a critical role in nearly all putative class actions, including at the class certification stage where parties rely on expert evidence to address the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that trial courts must look beyond the pleadings and conduct a searching inquiry to … Continue Reading
Co-authored by: John B. Lewis, Dustin M. Dow, Patrick T. Lewis, Danyll W. Foix, and Rodger L. Eckelberry Editor’s Note: This Executive Alert was published by members of BakerHostetler’s Securities Litigation and Regulatory Enforcement Team, Employment Team, and BakerHostetler’s Class Action Team. On March 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, Case … Continue Reading
On March 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, Case No. 11-864, which tightened class certification requirements in two respects. First, Behrend requires plaintiffs to show a method by which class-wide damages can be commonly calculated in Rule 23(b)(3) antitrust class actions. Second, the decision confirmed that the Court’s “rigorous analysis” … Continue Reading
Editors’ Note: The following post was originally published on Baker’s Employment Class Action blog. On November 5, 2012 the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Comcast Corporation v. Behrend, No. 11-864 which arose from an action brought by Philadelphia cable subscribers alleging that Comcast monopolized Philadelphia’s cable market and excluded competition in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of … Continue Reading
The 2013 Antitrust Review of the Americas features an article by Baker Hostetler Antitrust Group Chair Robert G. Abrams, Partner Gregory J. Commins Jr. and Counsel Danyll W. Foix. “‘Rigorous Analysis’: Recent Developments in Antitrust Class Action Litigation in the United States” examines recent developments in antitrust class action case law over the past two years … Continue Reading
The Supreme Court is set to hear oral argument in the case of Comcast v. Behrend this November. The Court’s decision in that case should further refine the Court’s guidance in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes about the proper standards for federal courts in reviewing motions for class certification. Recently, a team of appellate and … Continue Reading
Editor’s note: This post is the second in a series of posts from the Class Action Lawsuit Defense Blog’s interview with Mary Kay Kane, former Dean and Chancellor and current Emeritus Professor of Law at the University of California’s Hastings College of the Law. Professor Kane is the author of the Nutshell on Civil Procedure, … Continue Reading
A common temptation in class action litigation is to fashion procedures based on “rough justice” to avoid overburdening the courts or attempting to redress alleged mass harm. Over the past decade, as storage and computing power have increased exponentially, it has become increasingly tempting to use statistical sampling as a proxy for the actual adjudication of … Continue Reading
The Seventh Circuit’s recent decision in Messner v. Northshore University HealthSystem, No. 10-2514, 2012 WL 129991 (7th Cir. 2012) built on a 2010 decision from the Circuit and held that, where the admissibility of an expert critical to class certification issues is challenged, the district court must conduct a Daubert review prior to denying class … Continue Reading
After the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), the application of Daubert at the class certification stage has been one of recent confusion. Although not all circuits have addressed whether a full Daubert analysis is necessary at the class certification stage, the Eighth Circuit announced its approach in In … Continue Reading