Class Action Insider

The Surfside Condo Collapse Class Action final settlement proposal is nearly $1 billion. Judge Michael Hanzman set a firm trial date for March 27, 2023, and refused to consider any continuance which likely also helped facilitate the settlement.

The alleged health risks of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are garnering increased attention from plaintiffs’ lawyers.  In the wake of recent efforts to update risk evaluations and risk assessments by agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the Food & Drug Administration, and the Center for Disease Control, private plaintiffs are bringing products liability, mass tort, consumer protection, and consumer fraud claims using the health and safety findings (or inquiries) by the federal government as the lynchpin of their complaints.

In Olean Wholesale Grocery Co-op Inc v. Bumble Foods LLC, No. 19-56514 Dkt. No. 186-1 (9th Cir. Apr. 8, 2022), an en banc Ninth Circuit panel overturned a previous Ninth Circuit decision in this litigation, finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in certifying three classes of purchasers in their price fixing case against the three largest American producers of packaged tuna.

Where a federal agency has reviewed and approved a product label pursuant to a federal statute, claims brought under state laws challenging that label are preempted—however, preemption will not apply to claims premised on statements that are “materially different” from those reviewed.

The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey’s dismissal of several claims in Cohen v. Subaru Corporation exemplifies the utility of the economic loss rule and puffery arguments in the class action and false-advertising contexts.  Class action defendants should take note of these defenses as an opportunity to slice at the size and scope of plaintiffs’ cases.

Recent legislative activity suggests that class litigation may soon redress what some have described as a “Pink Tax”—a concept that has allegedly resulted in women, on average, each paying an estimated $1,350 more annually than men do for substantially similar goods and services.

Kim Kardashian’s compensated reference to a certain cryptocurrency may have been the most widely seen financial promotion in history, as observed by an industry expert. But is she liable to a putative class of investors who took her advice and lost money?