About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations July 2015 through February 2016 [1] (2015-2016)

handle is hein.ali/aggregate0015 and id is 1 raw text is: PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF AGGREGATE LITIGATION CHAPTER 2. AGGREGATE ADJUDICATION TOPIC 2. SUBSTANTIVE LAW AS A CONSTRAINT ON AGGREGATION §2.05 Choice of Law S.D.Fla.20 15. Subsec. (b) quot. in sup., quot. in case quot. in sup. Bank customers brought a multidistrict action against bank, alleging that defendant wrongfully extracted overdraft fees. This court granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification. In reaching its decision, the court determined that questions of law or fact common to class members predominated over any questions affecting individual members. The court cited Principles of the Law of Aggregate Litigation §2.05(b) and explained that the creation of subclasses to address variations in state law was appropriate because it made the cases manageable and suitable for class treatment. In re Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, 307 F.R.D. 630. 646. 652. TOPIC 3. SCOPE OF PRECLUSION AS A CONSTRAINT ON AGGREGATION §2.11 Preclusive Effect of the Aggregation Decision Itself C.A.9, 2015. Cit. in case cit. in conc. op., com. (c) cit. in ftn. to conc. op. Owners of video-game consoles filed a putative class action against manufacturer of the consoles, alleging that the consoles contained a design defect that gouged game discs. The district court granted defendant's motion to strike plaintiffs' class claims, finding that the denial of class certification in a similar action filed against defendant by different plaintiffs had preclusive effect. This court reversed and remanded, holding that the district court abused its discretion in granting comity deference to an earlier denial of class certification despite an intervening change in law. The concurring opinion explained that, under the Principles of the Law of Aggregate Litigation, an earlier denial of certification of a similar class gave rise to a rebuttable presumption that the litigation was not amenable to class treatment, but that the intervening change in the law rebutted the presumption in favor of that denial. Baker v. Microsoft Corp., 797 F.3d 607, 617, 621, superseding 785 F.3d 315. CHAPTER 3. AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS TOPIC 2. CLASS SETTLEMENTS AL .umX.J2Ia For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most