I hope everyone had a good Memorial Day weekend. This week, we take a brief look at a number of opinions that were decided last week, none of which are revolutionary, but all of which are useful to defendants at some stage of the class action. Think of it like a Memorial Day barbecue, a
CLE Presentation – The Gauntlet: Early Challenges to Class Certification
Earlier today, I had the distinct pleasure of presenting at the CLE International Class Action conference in Los Angeles with an old friend of mine, plaintiff’s lawyer Garrett Wotkyns of Schneider Wallace. The topic was The Gauntlet: Early Challenges to Class Certification, which regular readers will know is a topic near and dear to
The Uses of the Named Plaintiff Deposition II – Burns v. Bayer Corp. (S.D. Ill. 2012)
I’ve written before about the uses to which defense counsel can put a well-taken named plaintiff deposition. And, once again, an opinion has come along that showcases just how important the named plaintiff deposition is as a weapon to defeat class certification.
The case, Burns v. Bayer Corp., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33183 (S.D.
Class Action Litigation FAQ – Part I
As you may know, most bloggers have some kind of service that provides a statistical analysis of their site. In addition to telling us how many of you visit, and what you read, and whether you come back, these services also tell us what searches bring (some of) you here. And, over the last year
Murr v Midland National Life Insurance Co – The Importance of the Protective Order
Before we dive in today, I just want to apologize for not getting this post up yesterday. I’m in Boston, visiting my brand-new nephew, and so I’ve been a little preoccupied. So today’s post will be a quick one.
Every defense counsel in class actions has faced having to negotiate a protective order with the
Antoninetti v Chipotle – Discovery of Absent Class Members
Defendants face a dilemma when dealing with absent class members. On the one hand, they often have valuable information about a case, either as sources for variations that would defeat certification or as trial witnesses. On the other hand, plaintiffs will vigorously oppose any contact with absent class members, even if it is for
Investment Strategies and Securities Class Actions
I’ve talked before about the problem of circularity in securities class actions. Briefly put:
[A] securities class action takes money from the firm, and pays it to the shareholders, minus costs and attorneys’ fees. The hitch is that the firm is owned by the shareholders, which means that the attorneys have just taken money
Confidential Witness Confidential – City of Livonia Employees’ Retirement Sys v Boeing
The confidential witness is the bane of the securities defendant’s existence. While there may be some legitimate reasons to keep a witness confidential, the words "Confidential Witness #1" can also hide problems with the plaintiffs’ case, like sloppy research or outright misrepresentation.
How do we know this is the case? Well, many defendants
E-Discovery Sanctions by the Numbers
E-discovery: a term that has evolved from an interesting sidenote to something that can strike fear into the hearts of the most hardened defense lawyers. The Wall Street Journal Law Blog covered this issue a few weeks ago, pointing to a recent study by several King & Spalding lawyers published in the Duke Law Journal
In re Netbank – Confidential Witness Interrogatories
Plaintiffs in securities class actions often use "confidential witnesses" in their complaints to substantiate various allegations. The practice makes some sense at the complaint stage: it allows the plaintiff to plead fraud and loss causation with the specificity required by the PSLRA, without exposing potential witnesses to backlash from their employer should