The 7th Circuit in Schutte v. Ciox Health, LLC., construed the Local Controversy Exception to the Class Action Fairness Act.[1] CAFA’s Local Controversy Exception applies, in pertinent part, if “during the 3-year period preceding the filing of that class action, no other class action has been filed asserting the same or similar factual allegations against any of the defendants, on behalf of the same or other persons.”[2] The Court interpreted this requirement broadly, finding that even when cases with different legal theories had been filed in different states, courts may refuse to remand if there are “the same or similar factual allegations” in those cases. There are three other situations that trigger the Local Controversy Exception[3] but the court did not address them.
Continue Reading Seventh Circuit Construes CAFA Exception for the First Time
Removal
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Third-Party Removal Under Class Action Fairness Act
By Diane Flannery, Trent Taylor & Drew Gann on
On Tuesday May 28, 2019, the United State Supreme Court declined to afford state court third-party, class action defendants the ability to remove a class action to federal court. See Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, 17-1471 (May 28, 2019).
In Jackson, Citibank, N.A., filed a debt-collection action against George Jackson in North…