Class Action - The Class Action Blog by Carr Maloney PC

Fourth Circuit Reiterates that Absent Class Members Must Suffer Actual Harm

On January 23, 2025, the Fourt Circuit, in Alig v. Rocket Mortg., LLC, No. 22-2289, 2025 WL 271563 (4th. Cir. Jan. 23, 2025), reversed the District Court’s decision that a certified class action. In Alig, the plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against Quicken Loans, Inc. (now Rocket Mortgage), and alleged that the appraisals for the refinancing of their homes were not “independent’ because the defendants provided the homeowners’ estimates of their homes’ value to the appraisers. Thus, the plaintiffs alleged that the appraisals that they paid for were “worthless.”

The District Court certified a class of […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz|2025-01-24T10:02:21-05:00January 24th, 2025|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Alig v. Rocket Mortgage, Appraisal independence, Article III standing, Class Action, Class Action Lawsuits, Class certification reversal, Concrete harm in class actions, fourth circuit decision, matthew d. Berkowitz, Rocket Mortgage litigation, Statutory violations, TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez|

Read the Full Article

Supreme Court Announces Bright Line Rule in Determining Federal Courts’ Subject-Matter Jurisdiction

On January 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States in Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc., et al. v. Wullschleger et al., upheld the Eighth Circuit’s decision, holding that when a plaintiff amends their complaint and deletes the federal-law claims that give a federal court jurisdiction to hear the case, leaving only state-law claims behind, the federal court loses supplemental jurisdiction over the state claims and must remand to state court.

Plaintiff Anastasia Wullschleger filed a class action lawsuit in state court against Defendants Royal Canin U.S.A. Inc. and Nestlé Purina PetCare Co., alleging that the companies […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz and Kerri Nicholson|2025-01-22T12:54:03-05:00January 22nd, 2025|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Class Action, federal courts, federal law claims, federal question jurisdiction, kerri nicholson, matthew d. Berkowitz, state law claims, supreme court decision|

Read the Full Article

Supreme Court Declines to Consider New Pleading Standard for Securities Fraud Claims

On December 11, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed NVIDIA Corporation’s appeal, allowing a class action securities fraud case to move forward towards trial.

The Plaintiffs originally brought the case in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that during the class period May 10, 2017, through November 14, 2018, NVIDIA’s executives knowingly or recklessly made false or misleading statements to their investors by downplaying the potential effects that crypto mining or crypto currency sales would have on their gaming revenue. More specifically, the Plaintiffs alleged that 1) NVIDIA’s executives had knowledge that […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz and Nima Youchidje|2024-12-18T16:19:39-05:00December 18th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Class Action, matthew d. Berkowitz, nima youchidje, securities fraud|

Read the Full Article

Supreme Court to Determine Pleading Standard in Shareholder Class Actions

On June 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on Nvidia’s appeal of the Ninth Circuit’s decision to revive a shareholder class action lawsuit against the company. The Supreme Court will consider the appropriate pleading standard for a claim of fraudulent statements or omissions under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (“PSLRA”).

Nvidia is an artificial intelligence chipmaker and Nvidia chips have become popular for cryptomining (the complicated process used to secure cryptocurrencies). The class action lawsuit alleged that Nvidia misled investors about what amount of their […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz and Mac McCullough|2024-06-26T10:15:11-04:00June 26th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: #AIChipmaker, #CircuitCourt, #ClassActionLawsuit, #Cryptomining, #CryptoRevenue, #FraudulentStatements, #LegalAppeal, #LegalImplications, #LegalStandards, #Nvidia, #PleadingStandards, #PSLRA, #SecuritiesExchangeAct, #SecuritiesLaw, #SecuritiesLitigation, #ShareholderLawsuit, #SupremeCourt, SCOTUS|

Read the Full Article

Federal Courts Must Grant Requests for Stays Pending Arbitration

Last week, in Smith v. Spizzirri, the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a federal court must grant a party’s request for a stay while arbitration is pending. In Spizzirri, a group of delivery drivers sued their current and former employers in Arizona state court. The plaintiffs alleged they were misclassified as independent contracts and were denied benefits. The defendants removed the case to federal court. The defendants also moved to compel arbitration and dismiss the suit.

Plaintiffs agreed their claims are arbitrable but argued the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) only requires the court to stay, […]

By Stuart Davis|2024-05-21T09:20:05-04:00May 21st, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Arbitration, Circuit Split, Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), Federal Court, Judicial Rulings, Legal Decision, Legal Process, Litigation, Smith v. Spizzirri, Supreme Court|

Read the Full Article

The Real Estate Commission Settlement – What Does It Mean Other for Commission-Based Industries?

A Kansas City jury recently awarded a class of approximately 500,000 Missouri home sellers a verdict of $1.78 billion against the National Association of Realtors (NAR) and the four largest real estate broker franchises, finding the real estate entities conspired to require home sellers to pay an inflated brokerage commission in violation of antitrust laws. In Sitzer, et al., v. National Association of Realtors et al., Plaintiffs alleged that if a home seller did not agree to pay a set commission (usually 5-6%), his/her property would not be included on the “Multiple Listing Service” or MLS, […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz and Jeffrey Brundage|2024-04-24T15:09:30-04:00April 24th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: antitrust, brokerage, collusion, commission, conspiracy, home sellers, industry changes, lawsuit, Litigation, medical device sales, MLS, NAR, pharmaceutical, real estate, travel industry|

Read the Full Article

SCOTUS Deepens Circuit Split on Predominance Standard

The United States Supreme Court declined Visa and Mastercard’s petition for certiorari on Monday, thereby deepening a split between the circuit courts regarding the predominance standard for class certification. The National ATM Council, Inc. (NAC) filed a class action against the credit card companies for blocking ATM operators from charging customers different ATM fees. The credit card companies opposed certification by arguing, in part, that the putative class contained uninjured plaintiffs. They further argued this mixture of injured and uninjured plaintiffs failed to satisfy the predominance standard.

A federal judge disagreed and certified the class. The D.C. […]

By Stuart Davis and Matthew D. Berkowitz|2024-04-22T12:36:09-04:00April 22nd, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Supreme Court|

Read the Full Article

Supreme Court Holds that Pure Omissions Cannot Support a Private Cause of Action Under SEC Rule 10b-5(b)

After hearing arguments on January 16, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion on Macquarie Infrastructure Corp., et al. v. Moab Partners, LP, et al, on April 12, 2024. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve “whether a failure to make a disclosure required by Item 303 can support a private claim under . . . Rule 10b-5(b) in the absence of an otherwise misleading statement.” The Court held that a manager’s pure omission cannot support an investor’s cause of action under Rule 10b-5(b). Instead, “the failure to disclose information required by Item 303 can […]

By Kelsey Williams and Matthew D. Berkowitz|2024-04-17T10:37:21-04:00April 17th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Supreme Court|

Read the Full Article

Google Advertisement Privacy Case Gets Denied Its Certification Bid

On April 4, 2024, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied the certification of a class action lawsuit from potentially tens of millions of Google account holders against Google. Plaintiffs alleged that Google sells its account holders’ personal information billions of times each day to hundreds of participant advertisers despite repeatedly promising not to do so. In denying the class certification, the District Court held that while consumers meet certain certification requirements such as numerosity, typicality, and adequacy, the current class definition is improperly fail-safe. A fail safe class is one […]

By Matthew D. Berkowitz and Nima Youchidje|2024-04-16T08:53:12-04:00April 16th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: california, Civil Procedure, google, privacy case, United States District Court|

Read the Full Article

Preliminary Approval of Settlement in Cannabis Dispensary Employee Class Action Lawsuit

The New Mexico federal court preliminarily approved a class action settlement for $525,000 in a wage claim asserted by a group of hourly employees from two cannabis dispensary chains, Medicine Man Technologies, Inc. (which does business in New Mexico as Schwazze) and R. Greenleaf Organics, Inc.

The “budtenders,” as the employees are classified, typically earn more than $30 per month in tips in addition to an hourly rate of $15.75. The lawsuit alleges that it is company-wide policy for cash tips to be pooled and distributed to employees at the end of each workday in proportion to […]

By Stephen Rutigliano and Tina Maiolo|2024-04-12T13:30:53-04:00April 12th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: cannabis dispensary, cannabis law, Class Action, class action settlement, lawsuit, new mexico|

Read the Full Article

American Bar Association Moves to Dismiss Class Action Complaint Amid Rising Tide of Data Breach Litigation

The number of data breaches in the United States has increased significantly in the past ten years. According to an IBM study, more than 4 out of 5 companies have experienced a data breach at least once. These data breaches have generated a corresponding rise in class action litigation against companies. The American Bar Association (“ABA”) is one of the most recent high-profile examples of an organization contending with such a suit.

Tiffany Troy and Eric John Mata, current ABA members, filed a class-action complaint against the ABA on April 21, 2023, for breach of implied contract […]

By Stuart Davis and Danny Bartle|2024-03-04T09:08:23-05:00March 4th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: #AmericanBarAssociation, #ClassAction, #ClassCertification, #Commonality, #ConsumerProtection, #CyberSecurityPractice, #DataBreaches, #DataLeak, #FederalRuleofCivilProcedure, #FinancialInformation, #ImpliedContract, #Typicality, Cybersecurity, Litigation, predominance|

Read the Full Article

Supreme Court Evaluates Private Cause of Action for Allegedly Lying by Omission

On January 16, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Case Number 22-1165, Macquarie Infrastructure Corp., et al. v. Moab Partners, L.P., et al. Before the Court was whether a “failure to make a disclosure under Item 303 of the SEC regulation S-K can support a private claim under Section 10b of the Exchange Act, even in the absence of an otherwise misleading statement.”

Between February 2016, and February 2018, Macquarie Infrastructure Corporation (MIC) in various Management’s Discussion and Analysis allegedly “disclosed a few known trends that would affect their bottom line but omitted” a new […]

By Kelsey Williams|2024-02-05T15:06:30-05:00February 5th, 2024|Practice Areas: Class Action|Topics: Case Number 22-1165, Class Action, Exchange Act, Investor Lawsuit, Investors’ Rights, Investors’ Rights Expansion., Item 303, L.P., Legal Implications, Macquarie Infrastructure Corp., Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), Material Fact, Misleading Statements, Moab Partners, Omissions, Private Cause of Action, Rule 10b-5, SEC Enforcement, SEC Regulation S-K, Supreme Court, Transparency|

Read the Full Article