No Heightened Duty Owed to Class Representatives by Class Counsel
Posted on Dec 31, 2020 in Class Actions | Comments Off on No Heightened Duty Owed to Class Representatives by Class Counsel
Counsel for a proposed class do not owe the named class representatives a heightened fiduciary duty relative to other class members. So held the Eleventh Circuit in Medical & Chiropractic Clinic, Inc. v. Oppenheim, 981 F.3d 983 (11th Cir. 2020), a decision which marked the court’s return to an unseemly controversy stemming from litigation against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers alleging...
End of Engle Cigarette Litigation in Eleventh Circuit?
Posted on Nov 30, 2020 in Class Actions | Comments Off on End of Engle Cigarette Litigation in Eleventh Circuit?
Judge Kevin Newsom begins his opinion for the court in Harris v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 2020 WL 6816965 (11th Cir. Nov. 20, 2020), with the auspicious observation that this Engle case is “one of the last that we’re likely to see.” Correct or not, the comment evokes the long history in the Eleventh Circuit of the progeny of the Florida Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Engle v....
Summary Judgment for Defendants Affirmed in Securities Fraud Case
Posted on Nov 18, 2020 in Securities | Comments Off on Summary Judgment for Defendants Affirmed in Securities Fraud Case
In Whitehead v. BBVA Compass Bank, 2020 WL 6536897 (11th Cir. Nov. 6, 2020), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the defendant bank and bank officer on the plaintiff’s claims for securities fraud. The plaintiff, an investor, claimed that the defendants wrongfully failed to inform him of the risks involved in acquiring a certain CD for his investment...
Eleventh Circuit Bans Incentive Payments to Lead Plaintiffs in Class Actions
Posted on Nov 5, 2020 in Class Actions | Comments Off on Eleventh Circuit Bans Incentive Payments to Lead Plaintiffs in Class Actions
In what appears to be a first, the Eleventh Circuit recently held that federal law prohibits so-called “incentive payments” to class representatives, even as part of an agreed settlement. The court acknowledged that it was forging a new path in Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, 975 F.3d 1244, 1248–49 (11th Cir. 2020)—identifying errors that it said had “become commonplace in everyday...
Divided En Banc Court Dismisses FACTA Claims for Lack of Article III Standing
Posted on Nov 3, 2020 in Consumer Protection | Comments Off on Divided En Banc Court Dismisses FACTA Claims for Lack of Article III Standing
In Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc., 2020 WL 6305084 (11th Cir. Oct. 28, 2020), a divided en banc court vacated the district court’s order approving a class-action settlement and directed that the case be dismissed because the plaintiff lacked standing sufficient to establish subject-matter jurisdiction. Muransky filed a putative class action against Godiva, alleging that the...