Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
By now, most class action lawyers are familiar with the argument that a court must take a “close look” during the class certification stage in order to ensure that certification is indeed practicable and appropriate. Castano v. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734, 740 (5th Cir. 1996) (reversing certification decision for failure to assess “how a trial on the merits would be conducted”). This “close look,” or “rigorous analysis,” is not meant as an opportunity to prejudge the merits of the case, but is instead intended to give the court a realistic sneak preview of what trial of the issues will entail.
The latest iteration of Federal Rule 23 acknowledges the importance of the “close look.” Under the 2003 Amendments to Rule 23, it is no longer permissible to take a “certify now, ask questions later” approach. Compare Dec. 1, 1998 Amendment to Rule 23(c)(A) (providing that certification order “may be conditional”) with Dec. 1, 2003 Amendment to Rule 23(c)(A)(1) (deleting reference to conditional certification). Rather, plaintiffs must show at the class certification stage that class-wide proof of common issues exists. As the Advisory Committee noted, “an increasing number of courts require a party requesting class certification to present a 'trial plan' that describes the issues likely to be presented at trial and tests whether they are susceptible to class-wide proof.” Advisory Committee Notes to 2003 Amendment to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, subdiv. (c) ' 1. Forcing plaintiffs to articulate a realistic trial plan may be a valuable tool for educating the courts (and the parties) as to which cases are doomed to splinter into an endless stream of mini-trials.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.