Joshua A. Rubin, Attorney
Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP
- When the Supreme Court decided Comcast v. Behrend seven years ago, the general consensus was that it was a major win for the class action defense bar and would make it easier to defeat class certification. However, the actual response by the bench has been more mixed.
- On its face, Comcase holds only that a class’s damages model must align with its theory of liability. Yet some initially believed that Comcast would be read to affirmatively require a class-wide damages model to be established.
- With the benefit of almost a decade of subsequent case law, the legacy of Comcast can now be more easily seen. Rather than providing defendants with a new weapon to defeat class certification, the Comcast decision can more accurately be described as providing another arrow in the quiver of the “predominance” argument. Defendants are left to argue that individualized damages issues are among those individualized inquiries defeating predominance.
- The Fifth Circuit appears to be an outlier in adopting the “strong” reading of Comcast and requiring a damages model. Time will tell if the Supreme Court steps in again to resolve this split.
Gary S. Graifman, Partner
Kantrowitz, Goldhamer & Graifman, P.C.
I. ARBITRATION AND CLASS ACTION WAIVERS
- Definition of Class Action waivers
- Federal Arbitration Act
- Current State of Arbitration in Area of Employment law
II. RECENT REQUIREMENTS FROM THE NINTH CIRCUIT ON CLASS SETTLEMENTS
- Issuance of the Procedural Guidance for Class Action Settlements
Ezekiel L. Hill, Partner
Goodwin Procter LLP
- Personal Jurisdiction in Class Actions
- Applying the Supreme Court’s 2017 BMS decision to personal jurisdiction in class actions
- The Presumption of Reliance and Securities Class Actions
- The Second Circuit’s Goldman decision and the inflation-maintenance theory
- The Seventh Circuit’s Allstate decision and evidence of price impact