Sentences with phrase «decision on class action»

Not exact matches

In a decision on Friday, U.S. District Judge Thelton Henderson in San Francisco said the California plaintiffs may seek damages from Starbucks in their proposed nationwide class action, including for fraud and false advertising.

Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara, who joined the class - action lawsuit on the side of the dozen inmates and against the city, hailed the decision.

(James J. Barta and Michael G. Allen); «Ideas and Programs To Assist in the Untracking of American Schools» (Howard D. Hill); «Providing Equity for All: Meeting the Needs of High - Ability Students» (Sally M. Reis); «Promoting Gifted Behavior in an Untracked Middle School Setting» (Thomas O. Erb et al.); «Untracking Your Middle School: Nine Tentative Steps toward Long - Term Success» (Paul S. George); «In the Meantime: Using a Dialectical Approach To Raise Levels of Intellectual Stimulation and Inquiry in Low - Track Classes» (Barbara G. Blackwell); «Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning» (Robert E. Slavin); «Incorporating Cooperation: Its Effects on Instruction» (Harbison Pool et al.); «Improving All Students» Achievement: Teaching Cognitive and Metacognitive Thinking Strategies» (Robert W. Warkentin and Dorothy A. Battle); «Integrating Diverse Learning Styles» (Dan W. Rea); «Reintegrating Schools for Success: Untracking across the United States» (Anne Wheelock); «Creatinga Nontraditional School in a Traditional Community» (Nancy B. Norton and Charlotte A. Jones); «Ungrouping Our Way: A Teacher's Story» (Daphrene Kathryn Sheppard); «Educating All Our Students: Success in Serving At - Risk Youth» (Edward B. Strauser and John J. Hobe); «Technology Education: A New Application of the Principles of Untracking at the Secondary Level» (N. Creighton Alexander); «Tracking and Research - Based Decisions: A Georgia School System's Dilemma» (Jane A. Page and Fred M. Page, Jr.); and «A Call to Action: The Time Has Come To Move beyond Tracking» (Harbison Pool and Jane A. Page).

Eight jilted applicants have since filed a class action, alleging that DOJ improperly relied on politics in making hiring decisions and violated privacy laws by culling information from applicants» Web sites without disclosing that it had collected this information, as required by federal law.

Daniel Lublin appeared on CTV News on Friday, March 22, 2013 to comment on the Supreme Court's recent decisions in two high - profile class - action lawsuits regarding the issue of unpaid overtime.

The year 2017 saw two notable decisions in the area of shareholder derivative and class actions, one granting a corporation's motion to dismiss a derivative suit based on the results of a special litigation committee investigation, the other upholding the denial of class certification on the grounds that the proposed class representative could not adequately represent the class.

In the area of class actions, it is significant that a Respondent may now apply for leave to appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court granting a Motion for Authorization (Certification)(article 578), a move which will likely have an impact on strategy in first instance and Respondents» decisions whether to consent to authorization and proceed directly on the merits, or not.

In Crawford v. London (City), 2000 CanLII 22350 (ON SC), (2000), 47 OR (3d) 784 (S.C.J.), leave to appeal ref'd, [2000] O.J. No. 2088 (S.C.J.), referred to in the decision, a class action was permitted because an individual unit owner could not maintain a representative action under any act in Ontario on behalf of current or former owners of any of the units in a condominium corporatioON SC), (2000), 47 OR (3d) 784 (S.C.J.), leave to appeal ref'd, [2000] O.J. No. 2088 (S.C.J.), referred to in the decision, a class action was permitted because an individual unit owner could not maintain a representative action under any act in Ontario on behalf of current or former owners of any of the units in a condominium corporatioon behalf of current or former owners of any of the units in a condominium corporation.

This decision will likely have a ripple effect in Sixties Scoop cases across Canada, but each province's unique agreement with the federal government made a national class action suit on this issue impossible.

Examples include serving as lead defense counsel on the successful appeal to the Louisiana Supreme Court of a decision certifying a toxic tort class action in Alexander v. Norfolk Southern Corp., 82 So.3 d 1234 (La. 2012).

Mr. Whitney's representative work includes a series of successful outcomes pursuing false advertising claims against product review websites, a landmark victory clarifying copyright fair use and parody on behalf of several well - known musicians; a defense win dismissing copyright infringement claims brought by a putative class of attorneys against the leading legal research websites; a favorable outcome for a high - end beauty products company in a trademark and trade dress action against a manufacturer of knock - off products; a district and appellate court decision dismissing all claims by a proposed class against an international bank for alleged violations of, among other things, the Federal False Marking Act, RICO and the CAN - SPAM Act; and counseling prominent art museums and galleries on domestic and international copyright issues.

U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle of Washington, D.C., took a middle ground in her decision on Saturday in a class - action suit that contends Pacer fees violate federal law because they exceed the actual costs of providing the records, the National Law Journal reports.

Will the United States Supreme Court's decision on Halliburton impact Canadian securities class actions?

In the recent decision of Fantl v Transamerica Life Canada («Fantl»)[1], the Ontario Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Divisional Court's decision and confirmed the certification of class claims in negligent misrepresentation, noting that it was time for class actions to «deliver on their promise of access to justice» [2] when it comes to individual issues.

Class actions are designed to save Court time and to allow one judge to hear a representative case (s) once and to make one decision on the representative case which is binding on all the plaintiffs grouped in the cClass actions are designed to save Court time and to allow one judge to hear a representative case (s) once and to make one decision on the representative case which is binding on all the plaintiffs grouped in the classclass.

[10] In subsequent interlocutory decisions in class actions, Ontario courts have approved attempts to avoid the problem of proving pass - on by combining direct and indirect purchasers in the same class.

For Class Action information on LMK Lawyers, please download the pdf by clicking here: Bell Decision

Defended multinational bank against securities fraud claim in case in which the court denied class action certification in decision involving the efficient market hypothesis and fraud on the market theory.

Other landmark decisions involving Mr. Minami include: United Pilipinos for Affirmative Action v. California Blue Shield, the first class action employment lawsuit brought by Asian Pacific Americans on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans; Spokane JACL v. Washington State University, a class action on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans to establish an Asian American Studies program at Washington State University; and Nakanishi v. UCLA, a claim for unfair denial of tenure that resulted in the granting of tenure after several hearings and widespread publicity over discrimination in acaAction v. California Blue Shield, the first class action employment lawsuit brought by Asian Pacific Americans on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans; Spokane JACL v. Washington State University, a class action on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans to establish an Asian American Studies program at Washington State University; and Nakanishi v. UCLA, a claim for unfair denial of tenure that resulted in the granting of tenure after several hearings and widespread publicity over discrimination in acaaction employment lawsuit brought by Asian Pacific Americans on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans; Spokane JACL v. Washington State University, a class action on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans to establish an Asian American Studies program at Washington State University; and Nakanishi v. UCLA, a claim for unfair denial of tenure that resulted in the granting of tenure after several hearings and widespread publicity over discrimination in acaaction on behalf of Asian Pacific Americans to establish an Asian American Studies program at Washington State University; and Nakanishi v. UCLA, a claim for unfair denial of tenure that resulted in the granting of tenure after several hearings and widespread publicity over discrimination in academia.

Employers have to keep a close eye on this case, since the decision may shift the class action landscape in terms of the ability of employees to bring suit against a company.

On September 18, 2017, Justice Silverman of the BC Supreme Court released his decision finding that the action has been certified to proceed as a class action.

In this class of cases, we think the rule of action which should govern the civil courts, founded in a broad and sound view of the relations of church and state under our system of laws, and supported by a preponderating weight of judicial authority, is that whenever the questions of discipline or of faith or ecclesiastical rule, custom, or law have been decided by the highest of these church judicatories to which the matter has been carried, the legal tribunals must accept such decisions as final and as binding on them in their application to the case before them.

As a result of Justice Horkins» decision, the negligence claim based on constructive knowledge, as well as the other causes of action pleaded, will proceed as a class action.

Theses rulings will impact standing concepts and jurisdictional challenges, liability under the WARN and the ERISA, appeals of class certification decisions, challenges to EEOC administrative subpoenas, and rules on American Pipe tolling and application of statute of limitations in class actions.

While it is true that the bulk of appellate decisions mentioned on this blog relate to class actions, that has more to do with the fact that class actions are an easily «ascertained» subset of complex litigation than any decision to limit coverage of other «complex litigation» decisions.

But, based solely on the appellate decisions covered here, one might think that this site is restricted to class action topics.

On May 10, 2016, the United States District Court for the Central District of California, in a 31 - page decision, dismissed a putative class action lawsuit for securities fraud against Yingli Green Energy Holding Company Limited.

Panelists discuss recent class action fee decisions that focus on contract attorneys, cy pres awards, preparing fee requests and strategies for dealing with professional objectors.

But even if affirmed on appeal, plaintiffs» class action lawyers are likely to try to distinguish the facts in their cases from those in this UberBLACK decision.

The U.S. Supreme Court's June 2010 decision broadly bars plaintiffs from bringing class actions under U.S. law based on securities traded outside the U.S. Naturally, plaintiffs lawyers would now like to bring such suits under non-U.S. law.

The dissent further warned that the decision will «gum up the works of class litigation» by increasing the costs and complexity of class action litigation and compelling courts and class counsel «to take on a more active role in protecting class members» opt - out rights.»

Recently, Mr. Feldman obtained the decertification of a consumer class action on behalf of a leading manufacturer of natural health products and nutritional supplements, in a decision Law360 called one of the «Class Certification Rulings Every Litigator Needs to Know.&rclass action on behalf of a leading manufacturer of natural health products and nutritional supplements, in a decision Law360 called one of the «Class Certification Rulings Every Litigator Needs to Know.&rClass Certification Rulings Every Litigator Needs to Know.»

Panelists discuss recent state and federal class action fee decisions that focus on fee calculation methods, cy pres awards, fee reductions and more.

In our October 22, 2010 post, we reported on the New York Court of Appeals» decision in Flemming v. Barnwell Nursing, which denied awarding attorney's fees to a class action settlement objector whose efforts helped reduce requested class counsel fees of $ 448,000 down to $ 425,000 in a $ 950,000 settlement.

On July 4, 2017, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released a decision in Trillium Motor World Ltd. v. General Motors of Canada Limited about an appeal from a dismissal of a class action trial against General Motors of Canada by a group of its terminated franchisees / dealers.

On September 18, 2017, Justice Silverman of the BC Supreme Court released his decision finding that the action against Mac's Convenience Stores and three recruitment companies has been certified to proceed as a class action.

Advising on its complaint against the takeover of bmi by IAG and its appeal in the EU General Court against the European Commission's decision authorising the IAG / bmi acquisition, as well as on its class action settlement covering US and UK consumers related to cartel investigations into long - haul passenger fuel surcharges

In a June 21 decision, the B.C. Supreme Court in Dixon v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. looked beyond the identity of the proposed representative plaintiffs and instead focused on the manoeuverings of class counsel, ultimately finding the action was totally vexatious and an abuse of the court's process.

The Superior Court of Quebec found, among other reasons, that the class action was not based on any fault or abuse by the government, but rather the government's decision not to provide the necessary budget to put into place measures to reduce the noise level.

In a decision in Barwin v. IKO on July 19, Justice Deena Baltman had the task of certifying a class action related to allegedly defective shingles.

A concurring opinion by Justice John Paul Stevens means that the decision will most likely have to be applied on a case - by - case basis, looking at different types of statutes that states have enacted to place limitations on class actions.»

In a decision issued on July 27, 2015 but not yet published (but available here as a PDF), the Federal Court of Canada has certified a class action against the Government of Canada for disclosing the personal health information of participants in the «Marihuana Medical Access Program» in a botched mailout that was intended to advise program participants about changes to the regulation, which ironically where said to protect privacy and safety.

Judge Posner's class action settlement decisions — Judge Posner wins the award for the jurist having the single biggest impact on class action practice in 2014.

Laval argued that its policy on the use of third - party works was similar to York's policy and that the appeal court's decision in that case could impact the fair dealing analysis in the class action.

On June 25, 2009, I reported on the decision in Fresco v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, in which a Superior Court judge refused to certify a class action for employees of CIBC claiming overtime paOn June 25, 2009, I reported on the decision in Fresco v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, in which a Superior Court judge refused to certify a class action for employees of CIBC claiming overtime paon the decision in Fresco v. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, in which a Superior Court judge refused to certify a class action for employees of CIBC claiming overtime pay.

2013)(successfully obtained published Eighth Circuit decision reversing district court's dismissal of two consumer class actions on the grounds that that consumers lack injury - in - fact for purposes of Article III standing to pursue a claim for statutory damages arising out of federal notice requirements)(briefed and argued)

This week the Eighth Circuit issued its long - awaited decision in a class action against State Farm involving the «labor depreciation» issue that I have covered extensively on this blog (see my August 14 post and others).

More recently, we've taken on our first class action file, and, because we're small and we're nimble, we were able to fairly quickly assess that and make the decision, and so now we've embraced another type of fee arrangement within the firm.

This past Friday the Supreme Court of British Columbia released the May 6 decision in Koubi v. Mazda Canada Inc. [Mazda], certifying a class - action under the Class Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock declass - action under the Class Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock deClass Proceeding Act (CPA) on behalf of representative who purchased 17,909 Mazda3 vehicles between 2004 and 2007 over an alleged door lock defect.

Imax's summary judgment motion based on a limitation defence was denied yesterday, giving the class action bar cause for celebration in light of other recent decisions that seem to go against plaintiffs in similar circumstances where lengthy proceedings have delayed matters.