In a November 30, 2013 post, we wrote about the District of Massachusetts’ class certification decision in the antitrust case, In re Nexium. There, the district court certified a class of c…
In early 2001, I was asked to argue in opposition to a class certification motion in federal court on behalf of the prominent owner of an automobile distributorship. The case was brought on…
The Supreme Court Upholds the Basic Presumption in Securities Litigation but Gives Defendants a Chance for a Win at Class Certification
Earlier this spring, in our post titled, The Supreme Court Ponders the Future of the Basic Presumption in Securities Litigation, we reported on the oral arguments before the Supreme Court in…
Court Lowers the Bar for Numerosity Requirement in Nexium Antitrust Litigation
On the heels of his November 14, 2013 order certifying a class of individual consumers and other payors who alleged that defendant pharmaceutical companies engaged in anti-competitive practi…
Comcast and the Nexium Antitrust Case
On November 14, 2013, Judge William G. Young of the District of Massachusetts entered an order certifying a class of individual consumers and other payors who alleged that anti-competitive p…
Damages and the Predominance Analysis Following Behrend: The D.C. Circuit Gives Behrend a Robust Interpretation
Earlier this year, I blogged about the Supreme Court’s decision in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend. At the time, I noted that Behrend reaffirmed that damages methodologies must be closely examined…
High Court Strikes a Blow to Securities-Fraud Defendants Opposing Class Certification
In a watershed moment for class action securities litigation, last Wednesday the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, making it ea…
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend: A Question of Balance
It isn’t complicated. A majority of the Supreme Court holds that, where an expert’s model will not prove damages on a classwide basis, “[q]uestions of individual damage calculations will in…