Header graphic for print
CAFA Law Blog Information, cases and insights regarding the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005

Category Archives: Case Summaries

Subscribe to Case Summaries RSS Feed

Once Citizenship Prerequisites Have Been Established, Courts Consider a Six-Factor Balancing Test when Determining Whether to Exercise the Discretionary-Remand Exception under CAFA

Posted in Case Summaries

Speed v. JMA Energy Co., 2017 WL 2547240 (E.D. Ok. June 13, 2017). Once the court had determined that a sufficient number of the plaintiffs and the primary defendants were citizens all citizens of the state in which the suit had been brought, it weighed the remaining six factors under 28 U.S.C. § 1132(d)(3)(A)–(F) and decided […]

Read All ...

Federal Courts Have Jurisdiction Over All Claims if They Have Jurisdiction Over Some, and CAFA Doesn’t Support Claim-Splitting or Partial Remand of a Specific Remedy

Posted in Case Summaries

Chuang v. Dr Pepper Snapple, 2017 WL 2463951 (C.D. Cal. Jun 7, 2017). In denying the plaintiff’s motion to remand, a District Court in California found that the presence of at least some claims over which the district court has original jurisdiction is sufficient to allow removal of an entire case, even if other claims […]

Read All ...

Failure to Allege Actual Damages Defeated a Putative Class Action against Wish.com

Posted in Case Summaries

Max Gerboc v Context Logic, Inc., 2017 WL 3497405 (6th Cir. Aug. 16, 2017) Wish.com is run by the defendant ContextLogic, Inc. (“ContextLogic”).  The website works like a bazaar, where consumers can buy thousands of types of products, ranging from home goods to apparel. Plaintiff Max Gerboc (“Plaintiff”), one of those consumers, bought a pair of […]

Read All ...

Mass Action Should Contain 100 Or More Actual Named Plaintiffs; Not Just 100 Or More Named Or Unnamed Real Parties In Interest

Posted in Case Summaries

Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company v EZ-Flo International Inc., et al., Case No. 17-228 (C.D. Cal. May 3, 2017). In granting the plaintiffs’ motion to remand holding that the purported mass action was not brought by 100 or more plaintiffs, a District Court in California found that the language “100 or more persons” in mass action […]

Read All ...

Federal Court Declines to Remand Action to State Court Based on Abstention After Determining it had Jurisdiction Over the Matter

Posted in Case Summaries

Papurello v State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, 144 F.Supp.3d 746 (W.D. Penn. Nov. 16, 2015). In this action, the United States District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania (the “District Court”) denied the Plaintiffs Vincent and Linda Papurello’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion to remand finding Defendant State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (“Defendant”) clearly established diversity […]

Read All ...

Post Filing Changes To The Nature Of Class Actions Filed In The Federal Courts Under CAFA Does Not Divest The Federal Courts Of Its Jurisdiction

Posted in Case Summaries

Wright Transportation Inc v Pilot Corporation, 841 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2016). The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (the “Eleventh Circuit”) found that there was no distinction between the actions brought before a federal court asserting jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), and the actions brought in the state […]

Read All ...

Spirit of CAFA Law Encourages Exercising Supplemental Jurisdiction Over State Law Claims If A Federal Court Loses CAFA Jurisdiction Subsequent To Removal

Posted in Case Summaries

F5 Capital v Pappas, No. 16-530 (2d Cir. April 26, 2017). In this action, while holding that the district court retained jurisdiction, the Second Circuit found that given that CAFA was the jurisdictional anchor for the complaint and that the evident purpose of CAFA was to expand federal jurisdiction over suits that met its requirements, it would […]

Read All ...

Local Controversy Exception Cannot Be Read To Create A Jurisdictional Loophole To Defeat Federal Jurisdiction

Posted in Case Summaries

Davenport v Lockwood Andrews & Newman et al., 2017 WL 1457945 (6th Cir. April 25, 2017). In reversing the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan’s (the “District Court”) order granting the plaintiffs’ motion to remand, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (the “Sixth Circuit”) found that the […]

Read All ...

Proposal for a Bellwether-Trial Process Amounts to a Proposal to Try Their Claims Jointly Only When Bellwether Trial Has Preclusive Effect on the Plaintiffs in the Other Cases

Posted in Case Summaries

Dunson v. Cordis Corporation, 854 F.3d 551 (9th Cir. 2017) In this action, while affirming the judgment of a district court granting the plaintiffs’ motion to remand, the Ninth Circuit found that to constitute a trial in which the plaintiffs’ claims are “tried jointly” for purposes of § 1332(d)(11)(B)(i), the results of the bellwether trial […]

Read All ...

District Court Holds Nonbinding Bellwether Trial not a Joint Trial under CAFA’s Mass Action Provision

Posted in Case Summaries

Dunson v. Cordis Corporation, 2016 WL 5335551 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 23, 2016). A district court in California remanded actions consolidated for purposes of pretrial discovery and formation of a bellwether trial process, finding the request for a nonbinding bellwether trial did not meet the joint trial requirement of CAFA’s mass action provision.

Read All ...

“The Significant Defendant” Element Is A Narrow Exception Carefully Drafted To Ensure That It Does Not Become A Jurisdictional Loophole

Posted in Case Summaries

Atwood v. Peterson, No. 4:15-cv-00305 (E.D. Ark. Sept. 10, 2015). The plaintiff brought a putative class action against Walgreen Co. (“Walgreens”) and two of its district managers (“DMs”) in state court alleging violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 4-75-501(a)(2) which makes it unlawful to willfully refuse purchasers all rebates and discounts which are granted to other purchasers, […]

Read All ...

Supreme Court denies review of remand order surrounding Flint water treatment plant class

Posted in Case Summaries

The CAFA Law Blog previously analyzed the Sixth Circuit opinion in Mason, et al., v. Lockwood, Andrews & Newman (Nov. 16, 2016) surrounding the Flint, Michigan water treatment plant. See the CAFA Law Blog analysis here.  In that opinion, the Sixth Circuit affirmed the district court’s order remanding the case based on CAFA’s local controversy […]

Read All ...

Defendants were not Significant Defendants under CAFA’s Local Controversy Exception to Warrant Remand

Posted in Case Summaries

Grosshart v State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 2016 WL 5661526 (W.D. Mo. Sept. 29, 2016). In an action brought against an insurance company and its claims representatives, the United States District Court, Western District of Missouri (the “District Court”) found the claims representatives were not significant defendants under the Class Action Fairness Act’s (“CAFA”) […]

Read All ...

Post Removal Amendments Can be Considered in a Motion for Remand, if the Amendments Merely Clarified the Issues Pertaining to Federal Jurisdiction under CAFA

Posted in Case Summaries

Broadway Grill Inc v Visa Inc., 2016 WL 5390415 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 27, 2016). Plaintiff Broadway Grill, Inc. (“Broadway”) brought an action against defendants Visa Inc., Visa International Service Association, and Visa U.S.A. Inc. (collectively, “Visa”), based on alleged antitrust violations in setting of interchange fees that were imposed on merchants who accepted Visa-branded credit […]

Read All ...

District Court Follows Arbuckle in Determining that CAFA’s “Local Controversy” Exception Does Not Apply Where Ambiguities in Class Definitions Exist

Posted in Case Summaries

Municipal Water Authority of Westmoreland County v CNX Gas Co L L C , 2016 WL 5025752 (W.D. Pa. Sep. 20, 2016). In  this case the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (“District Court”) denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand determining that the plaintiff failed to establish the local controversy exception CAFA.

Read All ...

Eight Circuit Upholds Class Certification, Grant of Summary Judgment, And Holds Fee-Shifting Provision Applies to Class Action

Posted in Case Summaries

McKeage v. TMBC, LLC, 2017 WL 562456 (8th Cir. 2017). In an action removed under CAFA, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to the plaintiffs, but reversed the District Court’s determination of attorneys’ fee and remanded the action to consider whether the fee should be awarded on the trebled damages.

Read All ...

“Commonsense” Works In Invoking Home State Exception to CAFA

Posted in Case Summaries

Durfee v. McClatchey Newspapers, Inc., No. 2:15-cv-01891-TLN-EFB, 2016 WL 3181200 (E.D. Cal. June 7, 2016). In this case, the plaintiffs, newspaper subscribers, brought a putative class action in the state court alleging that the defendant corporation owns several newspapers throughout California involved in false and misleading billing practices in connection with newspaper subscriptions.

Read All ...

CAFA’s Local Controversy Exception: Claims in Prior Class Actions Need Only Be Similar, Not Identical, To Preclude Application of Exception

Posted in Case Summaries

Brown v Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., Civ. Action No. 1:16-cv-243, 2016 WL 6996136 (D.N.H. Nov. 30, 2016). In addressing whether the “local controversy” exception to CAFA jurisdiction was met, a federal district court in New Hampshire, following the precedent of the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, determined that the party asserting that an exception to CAFA jurisdiction […]

Read All ...

Removing Defendants Bear Burden of Proof on Jurisdictional Threshold

Posted in Case Summaries

Vilitchai v Ametek Programmable Power Inc., 2017 WL 875595 (S.D. Cal. March 6, 2017). A plaintiff brought a putative class action in California state court alleging the defendants violated various wage and overtime requirements set forth in the California Business and Professions Code. One defendant, Aerotek, Inc. (“Aerotek”), a staffing agency, removed the case to […]

Read All ...

Without Meeting Procedural Requirements, Non-Profit Organizations’ Action on Behalf of the General Public Is Not Necessarily a Class Action Removable Under CAFA

Posted in Case Summaries

Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Hormel Foods Corporation, — F. Supp. 3d —-, 2017 WL 1283411 (D.D.C. Apr. 5, 2017). In this action, in granting the plaintiff’s motion to remand, the U.S. District Court for the District Columbia found that because the plaintiff did not bring the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23—but […]

Read All ...

There Is No Anti-Removal Presumption In CAFA

Posted in Case Summaries

Rosenblatt v The Nuplexa Group Inc., Civ. No. 16-1064 (ES) (SCM), 2016 WL 3546579 (D.N.J. June 29, 2016). In deciding to remand an action to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Bergen County (the “State Court”), the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (the “District Court”) found that although removal […]

Read All ...

Pleading Under the Federal Rule 12(B)(6) Standard is not a Requirement in Assessing the Applicability of CAFA’s “Local Controversy” Exception

Posted in Case Summaries

MD Haynes, Inc. v. Valero Marketing and Supply Co., 2017 WL 1397744 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 19, 2017). In this action, a federal court in Texas found that while the plaintiffs did not plead according to federal standards or explicitly distinguish the conduct of individual defendants in their complaint, they had no obligation to do so […]

Read All ...