Practice Area

Contact Us Contact Us

1.800.553.9910

Class Action Litigation

We have substantial experience defending corporations in complex, national class actions.  We believe that our proven experience in defending nationwide class action cases and significant trial experience in complex commercial cases adds to our strategic approach in representing our corporate clients.  Our experience includes:

  • Strategic representation of our clients in all aspects of class action litigation, including the coordination of national, multi-venue, multi-party litigation matters;
  • Commercial class actions asserted against corporations, including securities fraud, consumer fraud, deceptive trade practices, false advertising antitrust, unfair competition, RICO, and insurance related claims, including claims brought under the following statutes:
    • Minnesota's Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act (Minn. Stat. §§ 325F.86-70)
    • Minnesota's Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Minn. Stat. section 325D.43, et. seq)
    • California's Song Beverly Credit Card Act (Civil Code §§1747, et seq.)
    • California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code §§1750, et seq.)
    • California's Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.)
    • California's False Advertising Law (Business & Professions Code §§17500, et seq.)
  • Securities class actions asserted against corporations and auditors in Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims;
  • Employment class action cases including claims of discrimination, nationwide hostile work environment claims, federal and state overtime exemption claims, and wage and hour claims.

Selected Experience*


Commercial Class Actions

  • Defeated class certification in the Northern District of Illinois where plaintiff alleged claims under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, common law false advertising, unjust enrichment, and declaratory and injunctive relief. As a result, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case.
  • Defeated class certification in the Central District of California where plaintiffs alleged claims under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), Cal. Civ. Code § 1750; the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200; the False Advertising Law (FAL), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500; breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; for common law advertising; for unjust enrichment; and declaratory and injunctive relief.  
  • Obtained early summary judgment in the Western District of Washington on behalf of a Fortune 50 company where the plaintiff alleged claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, the Washington Automatic Dialing and Answering Services Act, and the Washington Telephone Solicitation statute. The case is on appeal before the Ninth Circuit. 
  • Represented Portfolio Recovery Associates (PRA) in defending against class-action counterclaims which sought to invalidate arbitration awards in which the National Arbitration Forum (NAF) acted as the arbitration organization. After the Minnesota Attorney General sued the NAF in 2009, alleging that the NAF was secretly owned by a hedge fund that held a large stake in the debt-collection industry, the NAF settled and numerous consumers filed class actions against the NAF which were consolidated as part of multi-district litigation proceeding (MDL).  PRA opted out of the MDL. NAF and other defendants in the MDL ultimately settled by dismissing pending NAF arbitrations and paying over $3 million in cash. The NAF's MDL settlement agreement confirms that the value of the consumer arbitration claims dismissed following the 2009 settlement with the Minnesota Attorney General is at least $1,090,000,000.  In November 2010, PRA obtained a dismissal of Defendant/Counterclaimant Freeman's counterclaims with prejudice on the pleadings, as well as an order confirming the arbitration award.  After extensive briefing and oral argument, the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed that decision. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC v. Freeman, No. COA11-220, 2011 N.C. App. LEXIS 2233 (N.C. Ct. App. Oct. 18, 2011).
  • In re Imagitas, Inc. DPPA Litigation:  Defended government contractor in ten state class actions alleging that the insertion of advertising into motor vehicle registration mailings violated the federal Drivers' Privacy Protection Act, and subjected the contractor to $2,500 in statutory damages per person.  Transferred all cases to a single court for pretrial coordination.  The district court then granted summary judgment in a test case, which the Court of Appeals affirmed. 
  • Defeated class certification in a nationwide consumer class action in the Southern District of New York on behalf of large national corporation.  Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed and declined to appeal.
  • Defeated class certification in consumer class action brought in the Southern District of Florida alleging claims under the Florida Deceptive Uniform Trade Practices Act.  Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed case with prejudice.
  • Obtained dismissal of class action alleging violations of California's Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code §§1750, et seq.) arising out of charging of sales tax on retailer's mail-in rebate program.
  • Obtained dismissal of class claims brought under California's Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.) and False Advertising Law (Business & Professions Code §§17500, et seq.), and Minnesota's Prevention of Consumer Fraud Act (Minn. Stat. §§ 325F.86-70) and Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Minn. Stat. section 325D.43, et. seq) relating to provision of satellite television service.
  • Defended client in this class action lawsuit brought on behalf of its subscribers. The plaintiffs claimed over $400 million that our client had previously recovered from the tobacco industry. The claims of the individual plaintiffs were dismissed, and the claims of the plaintiff fully insured groups were then settled for $41 million (which included $30 million already designated for payment to the groups by the Minnesota Commerce Department). The Court reduced plaintiffs' request for lawyers fees by $1.5 million following our client's objection.
  • Defended national equipment leasing company in numerous lawsuits filed in state and federal court alleging fraud. Initially removed state court cases to federal court jurisdiction as a result of the pending bankruptcy of equipment supplier, and then acted as lead counsel in moving the Judicial Panel to transfer and consolidate all cases to an MDL proceeding in Tampa, Florida. The bankruptcy and MDL proceeding led to a global settlement.
  • Defended an antitrust lawsuit against Minneapolis Association of REALTORS®, securing a defense verdict following nine-week trial.
  • Obtained voluntary dismissal of two class action lawsuits brought against casualty insurance carrier in Madison County, Illinois arising from medical reimbursement paid under policies.
  • Defended health insurer in ERISA class action lawsuit alleging breach of fiduciary duty to self-insured plans. Obtained dismissal of the vast majority of plaintiffs' claims which were outside the statute of limitations period and for which plaintiffs did not have standing, which led to voluntary dismissal of the few remaining claims.
  • Represented corporation in a nationwide class action case filed in federal court for the Eastern District of Kentucky.  Plaintiff alleged breach of contract; violations of the Ohio and Kentucky Deceptive Business Trade Practices Act; and violations of the Ohio and Kentucky Consumer Protection Act.  In September 2007, the Court granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion dismissing the case. The Sixth Circuit later affirmed.
  • Represented large corporation in class action venued in Texas. Certification was denied on the nationwide class action claim concerning product leases, which denial order was reversed on grounds that the Court lacked jurisdiction; obtained settlement subsequent to the appellate decision.
  • Obtained denial of class certification for brick and mortar retailer in Song Beverly Credit Card Act (Zip Code) claim, California Civil Code Section 1747.08, holding requests for personal identification information as part of Reward Program enrollment and member lookups are special purposes incidental to the transactions and do not violate the Act.
  • Obtained denial of class certification in coordinated action alleging failures to redeem gift cards in violation of California Civil Code Section 1749.5, along with dismissal of claims for violations of False Advertising Law (California Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (California Civil Code §§1750, et seq.)
  • Secured exclusion of plaintiff's expert witnesses and obtained Summary judgment for national retailer in certified class action arising out of alleged violations of California's Unfair Competition Law (Business & Professions Code §§17200, et seq.) and False Advertising Law (Business & Professions Code §§17500, et seq.) relating to the Company's extended warranty / service plans.
  • Defended national insurance carrier in class action filed in federal district court in Florida arising from alleged substitution of non-OEM parts in automobile repair. Argued against class certification in district court and helped formulate McCarran Act argument that eventually led to the dismissal of the class action.
  • Represented large corporation in a matter that involved class-wide false advertising claims which were dismissed after the class representative deposition was completed.
  • Represented national retailer in nationwide consumer class action alleging breach of contract and unlawful merchandising practices. Defeated class certification, and obtained summary judgment on behalf of corporation; subsequently obtained affirmance of both rulings from the Missouri Court of Appeals.
  • Obtained decertification order from Texas Supreme Court on behalf of large corporation in a statewide consumer class action alleging breach of contract and unjust enrichment.
  • Obtained dismissal on the pleadings of a nationwide class action alleging claims of fraud and rescission and restitution.
  • Obtained summary judgment in Ohio state putative class action on behalf of national corporation in which plaintiff had alleged fraud, breach of warranty, and violations of Ohio's Consumer Sales Practices Act.
  • Represented manufacturer in a purported class action alleging consumer fraud in connection with the sale of product without certain technological features.
  • Represented manufacturer in defense of class action claim asserting RICO and state law claims based on alleged deceptive marketing and advertising campaigns. Obtained dismissal of claims under 12(b)(6). Ninth circuit affirmed that dismissal.
  • Defended national casualty insurers in class actions brought in more than 15 jurisdictions that alleged violations of state and federal law in connection with workers compensation pricing. Obtained dismissal of fraudulent concealment allegations in several of these cases, so as to greatly reduce exposure. Argued motion to dismiss RICO class action lawsuit brought against workers compensation insurers in the Southern District of Florida (Miami Division), which resulted in dismissal of all RICO claims with prejudice. After dismissal of Florida case, helped negotiate a global settlement of all pending cases.
  • Defeated attempt to certify national and California injunction classes for alleged violations of Robinson Patman Act and California Unfair Practices Act asserted by independent retailers against chain retailers and national media distributors. Case dismissed upon "nuisance" settlement. Summary judgment granted against putative class member's independent claim for damages.

Securities Class Actions

  • Represented large corporation in a Section 10(b) / Rule 10b-5 securities class action; obtained summary dismissal. The plaintiffs alleged that the company failed to disclose the problems it was encountering in the integration of an acquired company.
  • Represented a large company involved in the marketing of office equipment in a Section 10(b) / Rule 10b-5 securities class action; obtained summary dismissal. The case was settled while on appeal. The plaintiffs alleged that the company failed to make a timely disclosure of the difficulties it was having in integrating the operations of an acquired business unit.
  • Represented the auditors of a large financial corporation in a securities class action; obtained summary dismissal and sanctions against the plaintiffs' lawyers (they paid a large portion of the fees incurred by our client). The plaintiffs attempted to assert state common law claims, but company removed the case to federal court under SLUSA and demonstrated that the claims were really federal securities law claims and should be dismissed.
  • Represented large retail corporation in a Section 10(b) / Rule 10b-5 securities class action; obtained summary dismissal.  The plaintiffs alleged that the company failed to disclose deficiencies in its inventory control system.
  • Represented the auditors of a large software corporation in a Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 class action. The case was dismissed during trial after a motion that the plaintiffs had failed to prove loss causation. Although the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed (and the case subsequently settled), the grounds for the motion were recently affirmed by the Supreme Court in its most recent decision on loss causation.
  • Obtained settlement prior to trial in a Section 10(b) / Rule 10b-5 securities class action on behalf of the auditors of a bio-tech company. The principals of this company were convicted at a later criminal trial of perpetuating a fraud with the help of their non-US customers.
  • Represented the auditor of a mutual fund in a Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 securities class action that was dismissed on the pleadings.  The dismissal was reversed after appeal, and the case settled before trial.  The plaintiffs claimed that the auditors failed to disclose, through their audit opinion, facts that would have revealed the highly risky nature of the mutual fund's derivative strategy.

Employment Class Actions

  • We represented a large national retailer in a matter venued in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, before Judge Phyllis Hamilton. Ten named plaintiffs brought a purported national class action (and a California sub-class) asserting claims under Title VII and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Plaintiffs alleged discrimination based on race, gender, color and national origin regarding all terms and conditions of employment, including recruitment, testing, hiring, job assignments, allocation of hours, transfers, promotions, compensation and termination.  Plaintiffs sought class-wide injunctive and declaratory relief, back pay and punitive damages.   After successful motion practice, the case resolved under terms that provided no damages or backpay of any kind to the putative class.
  • Represented employer in a nationwide class action involving gender discrimination and hostile environment claims. The Court denied class certification of hostile work environment/sexual harassment claims and granted limited certification of compensation and promotion claims as to liability and injunctive relief only, reserving the question of damages certification to a later time. Employer obtained summary judgment dismissing the individual claims of hostile work environment/sexual harassment of 10 of the 12 named plaintiffs. Our firm's trial team prepared the case for an anticipated month-long trial. The certified pay and promotion claims were settled the night before jury selection.
  • Represented employer in age discrimination class action resulting from reduction-in-force in company's IS Department; case settled just before trial.
  • Represented an employer in a class action brought by employees working in branches across the nation who claimed that they had been misclassified as employees exempt from overtime pay. Approximately 700 employees opted into the litigation. Employer obtained summary judgment on the lead plaintiff's claim, finding her job duties were exempt from overtime requirements. The employer also defeated plaintiffs' class-wide motion for summary judgment. The Court granted the employer's motion to decertify the class and dismissed all but the remaining named plaintiffs' claims. The case subsequently settled.
  • Represented an employer in an action brought by general and assistant managers in 65 stores located in California who claimed that they had been misclassified as employees exempt from overtime pay. After initial discovery and motions, the general managers' claims were dismissed and the class period was restricted to February 2003 (plaintiffs had sought a class definition without any ending date). The case also involved Title VII claims of gender discrimination and harassment. While employer's motion to decertify the classes was pending, the matter settled.
  • We represented a national retailer in a matter commenced in March 2006 in United States District Court, Northern District of California, before Judge Marilyn Patel. This class action seeks unpaid wages and penalties related to alleged employee searches upon entry at the beginning and exit after the workday.  A mediation was held after  the  Ninth Circuit declined to review a class certification order, and settlement was reached on favorable "claims made" terms.
  • Represented employer in a California statewide class action (Alameda County Superior Court) alleging claims for off-the-clock, overtime, meal and rest break violations and waiting time penalties for all store non-exempt employees after an audit by the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) resulted in a settlement. Mediated settlement prior to class certification resulted in substantial employer retention of compromise settlement fund.
  • Represented employer in a statewide class action (removed to United States District Court, Central District of California) alleging off-the-clock work, meal and rest break violations, failure to properly calculate "regular rate" for overtime pay, and failure to pay for all accrued vacation, absence and personal holiday time off.  Two of three plaintiffs have dismissed their claims and the remaining named plaintiff refiled only on the claim regarding improper calculation of "regular rate of pay" for overtime related to incentive payments.  Case was dismissed without prejudice.
  • Providing assistance to in-house counsel and an audit team in responding to audit order from the California DLSE. At issue are exempt classification of managers and administrative personnel, meal and rest break compliance, overtime calculation and payment, and documentation of payroll. Enforcement action is being held in abeyance pending completion of audit.
  • Represented employer in class action venued in Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda. The plaintiff employee alleged, on behalf of a class of similarly situated current and former employees, a wage and hour claim resulting from the employer's purported failure to issue paychecks without an in-state bank for presentation at no cost. The case settled following mediation.
  • Represented employer in audit order from the California DLSE regarding exempt classification of managers and administrative personnel, meal and rest break compliance, overtime calculation and payment, and documentation of payroll. Compromise settlement was reached with DLSE on meal break compliance and salaried overtime only (other issues being abandoned).
  • Represented employer in class action venued in Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, against class claims for wages and penalties resulting from the employer's purported failure to issue paychecks without an in-state bank for presentation at no cost. The case settled on favorable terms following mediation.
  • Represented franchisor against claims by employee of a California franchisee alleging franchisor was liable plaintiff and the similarly situated class as a "joint employer" for wages and meal and rest break violations. Case dismissed against franchisor.
  • Representing employer in a California statewide class action (Los Angeles County Superior Court) alleging violations for mis-classification of managers, off-the-clock work, meal and rest break compliance, and associated wage statement and late payment penalties.
  • Representing employer in a statewide class action alleging improper calculation of "regular rate of pay" for overtime related to incentive payments and for related late payment and wage statement penalties. Case pending court approval of favorable "claims made" settlement.
RSS Litigation Practices > Class Action Litigation

* Past results are reported to provide the reader with an indication of the type of litigation in which we practice and do not and should not be construed to create an expectation of result in any other case as all cases are dependent upon their own unique fact situation and applicable law.

My Pages

Sign up for email updates and track your favorite web pages