On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court sided
with Wal-Mart in a long-awaited decision regarding standards that apply to
class action cases. The new opinion makes it harder for plaintiffs to obtain
The case was brought by three female Wal-Mart employees
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court sided with Wal-Mart in a long-awaited decision regarding standards that apply to class action cases. The new opinion makes it harder for plaintiffs to obtain class certification [ Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes - an enhanced version of the opinion is available...
On June 20, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes ( an enhanced version of the opinion is available to lexis.com subscribers. ), which overturned certification of a class of 1.5 million current and former female Wal-Mart employees alleging gender discrimination...
WASHINGTON, D.C. - (AP) The Supreme Court's conservative majority made it harder for people to band together to sue the nation's largest businesses in the two most far-reaching rulings of the term the justices are wrapping up on Monday. The two cases putting new limits on class-action lawsuits...
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark June 20, 2011 decision in Wal-Mart Stores v. Dukes , numerous commentators have asserted that the case could have a significant impact on future class actions. For example, one law firm's memo about the case stated that the decision "should...
PHILADELPHIA - Does the U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. engage in judicial activism? Yes, according to a reporter who has covered the high court for more than 50 years. But, he says, that's not a negative quality, or unusual. And he has a pretty narrow definition of "activism...
I talked last week with Steve
Berstler , the producer and anchor of LexisNexis® Legal News audio podcasts,
regarding the Supreme Court's decision in Wal-Mart v. Dukes . The
highlights of our conversation are featured in the Legal News Podcast for June 21, 2011 .
As discussed in the podcast...
Last Friday, Labor Secretary Hilda Solis released the
following statement about the Dukes v. Wal-Mart decision on the DOL's Work in
Progress blog :
The Court's decision in the Walmart lawsuit made no
ruling on whether America's largest employer engaged in unlawful pay
Two flagship publications in Matthew Bender's Federal Litigation product line, Moore's Federal Practice and Modern Federal Jury Instructions , were cited in recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions.
In the landmark employment law case Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (2011 U.S. LEXIS 4567, June 20...
By: A. Peter Brodell, Turner A. Broughton
& Joseph R. Pope
On June 20, 2011, the United States Supreme Court issued
its much anticipated Wal-Mart v. Dukes, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4567 [ an enhanced version of this opinion is available to lexis.com
subscribers / unenhanced version available from lexisONE...
And so it begins. Wal-Mart v. Dukes [ an enhanced version of this opinion is available to lexis.com
subscribers / unenhanced version available from lexisONE Free Case Law ] has already
changed the course of class actions in 2011. In Cruz v. Dollar Tree Stores,
Inc. , the Northern District of California...
LexisNexis Overview: Employees'
Title VII sex discrimination class action claims against a nationwide employer
could not be certified under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2) due to lack of
commonality; the employees did not offer adequate proof that the employer
operated under a general policy of discrimination...
In Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v.
Dukes, the Supreme Court ruled that a class in a massive gender discrimination
case had been improperly certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
23(b)(2), both because common questions were lacking under Rule 23(a)(2), and
because the class had sought individualized...
Back in June, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a class of 1.5 million women could not pursue gender
discrimination claims together against Wal-Mart because they lacked a
If, at first, you don't succeed, file this Complaint
in California on behalf of a class of only...
By Eric Meyer
Back in June, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a class of 1.5 million women could not pursue gender discrimination claims together against Wal-Mart because they lacked a common injury.
If, at first, you don't succeed, file this Complaint in California on behalf of a...
By Louis M. Solomon
Our immediately prior posting addressed the issue of how a single case in a multiparty, multidistrict litigation raising industry-wide antitrust claims was plucked out and sent to arbitration. How a plaintiff manages around that result is a question not just of international litigation...
By Joshua Druckerman
Imagine, for a moment, that a company told its employees that they could not record overtime hours, even if they were eligible for overtime compensation. Not exactly the nicest thing to do, right? Now imagine this company also forced its employees to work through unpaid breaks...
I heard that there was some Supreme Court decision last week about healthcare. Want the scoop? Google it.
They zig, I'll zag with the scoop on some other pending employment-law legislation of which employers should take note.
Courtesy of the Washington DC Employment Law Update , pay attention...
by E. Colin Thompson and J. Trumon
The Florida Supreme Court has issued a decision that
plaintiffs' lawyers will surely argue makes certification of class actions
easier in Florida state courts than in federal and other state courts.
In its per curiam decision entered in Soper v...
On March 4, 2013 the Ninth Circuit issued a second
opinion in the action, Wang
v. Chinese Daily News ( Wang II ) , in which it reversed the class
certification it had previously affirmed and remanded the matter for further
consideration of Rule 23(a) commonality and Rule 23(b)(3) predominance.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - (Mealey's) The U.S. Supreme Court
today ruled 5-4 that a district court may not certify a class action under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) without resolving whether the class
has introduced admissible evidence, including expert testimony, to show that
the case is...
By Joan Grossman
WASHINGTON, D.C. - (Mealey's) The U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 ruled 5-4 that a district court may not certify a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) without resolving whether the class has introduced admissible evidence, including expert testimony, to...
On March 27, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court continued its
recent trend of imposing more stringent standards for class certification in Comcast
Corporation v. Behrend , 569 U.S. ___ (2013) [lexis.com
subscribers may access the opinion] . At issue was whether the proponents...