Episode 12 is now live. In this episode of Consumer Counterpoint, we sit down with Gina Ferrari, National Chair of Seyfarth’s Litigation Department, for a practical and insightful discussion on the rise of mass arbitration. We break down what mass arbitration is, why it has become a flashpoint for companies in recent years, and
Seyfarth Shaw’s Consumer Class Action and Product Liability Groups Receive Coveted Recognition from Legal 500
Seyfarth Shaw’s Consumer Class Action and Product Liability groups have achieved a prestigious ranking in the highly regarded Legal 500 United States 2023 edition, solidifying their reputation as one of the nation’s top legal teams. This recognition reaffirms Seyfarth’s unwavering commitment to excellence in Product Liability, Mass Tort, and Class Action law.
The Legal
Reigning in Consumer Class Actions: Ninth Circuit Focuses on Need to Provide Concrete Facts to Support Alleged Injury in Fact for Article III Standing
Background
A recently decided Ninth Circuit case provides additional guidance for defendants looking to challenge standing in consumer class actions. In, McGee v. S-L Snacks National, Plaintiff brought a putative class action asserting claims of unfair competition, nuisance, and breach of the implied warranty of merchantability arising from her contention that her popcorn brand
Greg Markel and Gina Ferrari Pen Cover Article for Practical Law Magazine
Greg Markel and Gina Ferrari wrote “Settling Securities Class Actions,” the cover article for the December issue of Practical Law magazine. You can view the article here.
We hope you find this article helpful and insightful.
In this article, Greg and Gina discuss the various tactical and strategic questions and concerns that can affect
Post-Pandemic Litigation Webinar Series
From court closures and the way judges conduct appearances and trials to the expected wave of lawsuits across a multitude of areas and industries, the COVID-19 outbreak is having a notable impact in the litigation space—and is expected to for quite some time.
To help navigate the litigation landscape, we are kicking off a webinar
District Court Judge Rejects M&A Mootness Fee Settlement As A “Racket” That “Must End”
Seyfarth Synopsis: Following Delaware’s lead in Trulia, an Illinois District Court judge refused to approve a mootness fee settlement as “worthless to the shareholders.” The judge noted that such settlements amounted to a plaintiffs’ bar “racket” with the goal of obtaining fees in cases that should be “dismissed out of hand.” Specifically, Judge Thomas M.
You Are Invited! Upcoming Webinar: Hot Topics and Trends in Consumer Class Action Law
On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Jason P. Stiehl, Giovanna A. Ferrari and Jordan P. Vick will present the first installment of the 2015 Class Action Webinar series. They will provide a summary of key decisions from 2014, identify key trends for companies to watch for in 2015, as well as practical
Individualized Inquiries Predominate in Call Recording Cases: California Court of Appeal Affirms Denial of Class Certification in Call Recording/Privacy Case Because Individual Issues Predominate Regarding Each Putative Class Members’ Expectation of Confidentiality
Summary
California Penal Code Section 632 has provided a springboard to litigation related to the recording of telephone calls in the State of California. Last week, in Hatisihi v. First American, Case No. B244769 (Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist.), the California Court of Appeal affirmed the recent trend of class certification denials in
Eighth Circuit Rules that Class Action Fairness Act Removal Requires Only “Plausible” Evidence of Amount in Controversy
Earlier this month, the Eighth Circuit weighed in on the issue of jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (d)(2), in Daniel Raskas v. Johnson & Johnson et al., Marjie Levy v. Pfizer Inc. and Leslie Yoffie v. Bayer Healthcare LLC (“Raskas”). The Court held that the Defendants needed