Home > Multidistrict Litigation

CLASS ACTION DEFENSE BLOG

Welcome to Michael J. Hassen's Blog. Here you will find over 2,000 articles related to class actions.

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Regions Morgan Keegan: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Western District of Tennessee

Apr 3, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Over Objection of Three Class Action Plaintiffs, Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of 20 Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 (Excepting One Class Action from Centralization Order) and Transfers Class Actions to Western District of Tennessee Twenty-one (21) class actions – 18 in the Western District of Tennessee, and one class action each in the Northern District of Alabama, the Southern District of Indiana and the Middle District of Tennessee – were filed against Regions Financial Corp.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Land Rover LR3: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Central District of California

Mar 27, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Over Objection of Class Action Plaintiffs, and Transfers Actions to Central District of California Eight class actions – three in California and one each in Colorado, Maryland, New Jersey, Washington and Wisconsin – were filed against Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC alleging that “geometry alignment defect that causes uneven and premature tire wear on model year 2005 and 2006 Land Rover LR3s.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Lehman Brothers: Judicial Panel For Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Southern District Of New York

Mar 20, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of Individual and Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Over Opposition of Majority of Plaintiffs, and Transfers Actions to Southern District of New York Seventeen (17) individual and class actions – nine in New York, five Arkansas, two California and one in Arkansas – were filed against Lehman Brothers and various other defendants alleging that defendants had made materially false and/or misleading statements that negatively impacted the value of Lehman Brothers securities.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation PSLRA/SLUSA Class Actions Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Antitrust Class Action Defense Cases–In re Flat Glass: Pennsylvania Federal Court Denies Motion To Dismiss Antitrust Class Action Finding It Adequately Alleged The Existence Of An Agreement Or Conspiracy To Restrain Trade

Mar 19, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Allegations in Class Action Complaint were Adequate to Defeat Motion to Dismiss Antitrust Class Action Pennsylvania Federal Court Holds Plaintiffs filed an antitrust class action against various defendants, consisting of “certain United States manufacturers of high quality flat glass used for construction and architectural applications (‘Construction Flat Glass’)”; the class action complaint asserted that the defendants engaged in price fixing in violation of §1 of the Sherman Act. In re: Flat Glass Antitrust Litig.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Fannie Mae: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Southern District of New York

Mar 13, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Largely Unopposed by Class Action Plaintiffs, and Transfers Actions to Southern District of New York Nineteen (19) class actions – 15 in New York and one each in the District of Columbia, Florida, New Jersey and Pennsylvania – were filed against the Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and numerous other defendants alleging that “Fannie Mae was undercapitalized during the relevant time period, and that defendants concealed this fact from investors in order to raise capital.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Chrysler: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Plaintiff Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In District Of New Jersey

Mar 6, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Plaintiff Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Opposed by Common Class Action Defendant, and Transfers Class Actions to District of New Jersey Five class actions – one each in California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, and New York – were filed against Chrysler arising out of an alleged defect in the 2.7 liter engine used in several Chrysler cars; specifically, the class actions alleged that design defects made the 2.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Bank of America Auction Rate Securities (ARS): Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation But Transfer Class Actions To California

Feb 27, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Judicial Panel Grants Defense Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Opposed by Responding Class Action Plaintiffs, but Transfers Actions to Northern District of California Three class actions – one each in California, Illinois and New York – were filed against Bank of America Investment Services, Inc.; Bank of America Securities, LLC; Bank of America Corp. (collectively “BofA”) alleging “that Bank of America entities and/or its employees made misrepresentations in the context of the sale of auction rate securities (ARS).

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation PSLRA/SLUSA Class Actions Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases— In re Text Messaging Antitrust: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Plaintiffs’ Motions To Centralize Class Action Litigation But Chooses Northern District Of Illinois As Transferee Court

Feb 20, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Faced with Three Motions for Centralization, Judicial Panel Grants Plaintiffs’ Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, Unopposed by Responding Class Action Plaintiffs and Defendants, and Transfers Class Actions to Northern District of Illinois Sixteen (16) class actions – filed in federal courts in the District of Columbia, Arkansas, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, and Texas – were filed against various defendants alleging violations of federal antitrust laws; 15 additional and related class actions also were filed, and were treated as potential tag-along class actions.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re Processed Eggs: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Plaintiffs’ Motions To Centralize Class Action Litigation And Transfers Class Actions To Eastern District Of Pennsylvania

Feb 13, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Faced with Two Motions to Centralize Class Actions, Judicial Panel Grants Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 and Agrees with Plaintiffs in Pennsylvania Class Actions that Eastern District of Pennsylvania is the Appropriate Forum for the Class Actions Three class actions –two in Pennsylvania and one in Minnesota – were filed against various defendants alleging federal antitrust violations; 16 related class action lawsuits subsequently were filed (12 in Pennsylvania, 3 in Minnesota and one in New Jersey), which were treated as potential tag-along cases.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...

 

Class Action Defense Cases—In re VistaPrint: Judicial Panel On Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Grants Defense Motion To Centralize Class Action Litigation In Southern District Of Texas

Feb 6, 2009 | By: Michael J. Hassen

Faced with Two Motions to Centralize Class Actions, Judicial Panel Grants Request for Pretrial Coordination of Class Action Lawsuits Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407 and Agrees with Defendants that the Southern District of Texas is the Appropriate Forum for the Class Actions Seven class actions –two in Massachusetts; and one each in Alabama, Florida, Nevada, New Jersey and Texas – were filed against various defendants including VistaPrint, Vertrue and Adaptive Marketing, alleging violations of the federal Electronic Fund Transfer Act and the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

Class Action Court Decisions Multidistrict Litigation Uncategorized

Read more...