BarbriSFCourseDetails
  1. keyboard_arrow_leftBack

Course Details

Course Information
  • smart_display Format

    On-Demand

  • signal_cellular_alt Difficulty Level

  • work Practice Area

    Class Action and Other Litigation

Date & Time
  • event Date

    Wednesday, January 18, 2023

  • schedule Time

    1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT

  • timer Program Length

    90 minutes

Credit Information

  • This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.

$297.00
CLE
ALL

This CLE webinar will discuss the continuing viability and attractiveness of nationwide class actions in federal court. The panel will address the possibility and practicality of bringing claims arising in divergent jurisdictions against a defendant in a single forum, and whether the increasing importance of class member standing on settlement and certification renders the benefits of class actions unattainable.

Faculty

Michael J. Ruttinger
Partner
Tucker Ellis

Mr. Ruttinger develops and implements strategies for clients in class action, commercial and complex litigation across the country. He advises and advocates for clients at all phases of a case, from pre-litigation consulting on regulatory issues, to dispositive and class-certification motions, to appeals. Mr. Ruttinger regularly handles complicated, high-stakes issues for clients ranging from challenges to class certification to developing strategies for seeking summary judgment and excluding unreliable expert opinions. He is a frequent writer and speaker on the application of class action and product liability laws to emerging technologies.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio
Jessica D. Miller
Partner
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom LLP

Ms. Miller has broad experience in the defense of purported class actions and other complex civil litigation with a focus on product liability matters and multidistrict litigation proceedings. She has been responsible for case coordination, strategy, and law and motions in numerous federal and state court coordinated proceedings involving pharmaceutical products, medical devices and industrial products. Ms. Miller speaks frequently at seminars and symposia on litigation-related issues.

expand_circle_down Expand to View Full Bio expand_circle_up Collapse Bio

Description

Many assumptions about the benefits of filing, and best strategies for settling or defending, nationwide class actions have been upended in recent years, calling into question their viability and practicality.

First, the question whether plaintiffs from multiple states can establish personal jurisdiction in a single federal forum in cases against defendants who are neither based nor incorporated in the state where suit is brought continues to be a thorny issue. Three circuit courts have offered three different responses to Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California, 137 S.Ct. 1773 (2017), and courts continue to grapple with the limits of personal jurisdiction in the wake of Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth Judicial Dist., 140 S.Ct. 1017 (2021).

Second, the Supreme Court’s recent decision about Article III standing in TransUnion L.L.C. v. Ramirez, 141 S.Ct. 2190 (2021), could keep plaintiffs out of federal court, but may have made large-scale settlements more difficult and less beneficial, thereby potentially increasing the number of lawsuits defendants must face. If TransUnion means that a settlement class may contain only members with standing under the laws of the forum state, not only is there less peace to be bought and sold, but parties may now also be forced into significant and expensive upfront discovery about absent class members' standing. Both sides will need to consider new strategies.

Listen as this experienced panel of class action lawyers discusses whether nationwide class actions remain a viable option for plaintiffs and how recent developments may affect defendants’ strategies.

Outline

  1. Difficulties in gaining personal jurisdiction over defendants
    • Bristol-Myers Squibb (Supreme Court)
    • Molock v. Whole Foods (2d. Circ.)
    • Mussat v. IQVIA (7th Cir.)
    • Cruson v. Jackson Nat’l Life Ins. Co (5th Cir.)
  2. The effect of heightened scrutiny of standing
    • Class representative
    • Absent class members
    • Certification
    • Settlement
  3. Conclusions

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key questions:

  • Must the standing inquiry focus on the class representatives or absent class members?
  • Does either side--plaintiff or defense--benefit if fewer nationwide class actions are brought or concluded in federal court?
  • How will changes to the availability of nationwide class actions affect litigation costs?
  • How would the inability to achieve nationwide settlement, including against class members that might lack standing, affect what the parties do at the certification stage?