Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In the context of civil class action litigation, “ascertainability” includes the identification of individuals who qualify for class membership. Although not an explicit Rule 23 requirement, since the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit’s decision in Carrera v. Bayer Corporation, 727 F.3d 300 (3d Cir. 2013), federal appeals courts have been divided over the significance and scope of the ascertainability requirement, particularly in litigation involving low-cost consumer goods as consumers may not retain receipts for such items to document proof of purchase.
*May exclude premium content
By Steven P. Benenson
In the past several years, plaintiffs’ firms have threatened or brought class actions against different companies under New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA). Here's what you need to know.
By Mitch Warnock
When you take a catastrophic injury case involving paralysis, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the problems and pitfalls. In this article, the author explores, from personal experience, the different types of future expenses the client can expect to incur.
By Shannon E. McClure and Whitney Mayer
The FDA’s recent approval of 23andMe’s direct-to-consumer genetic test to identify genes associated with 10 common diseases and disorders could result in a widespread expansion of patients armed with individualized health information. This expansion of genetic information in the hands of consumers potentially impacts regulatory and litigation issues for pharmaceutical companies.
Discussion of major rulings out of Texas and California.