Interested in training for your team? Click here to learn more

TransUnion's Standing Analysis and Class Certification: Practical Defense Strategies for Attacking Standing Early

Recording of a 90-minute CLE video webinar with Q&A

This program is included with the Strafford CLE Pass. Click for more information.
This program is included with the Strafford All-Access Pass. Click for more information.

Conducted on Thursday, February 2, 2023

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926

This CLE webinar will provide class counsel with an overview of the current legal landscape surrounding the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in TransUnion L.L.C. v. Ramirez, 141 S. Ct. 2190 (2021). The panelists will examine the latest and varying court rulings as to how the Supreme Court's standing analysis affects the parties at the class certification stage and discuss defense strategies for utilizing TransUnion to attack standing at the early stages of class action litigation.

Description

In June 2021, the Supreme Court made a simple pronouncement in TransUnion L.L.C. v. Ramirez: "No concrete harm, no standing." In the ruling, the Court struck down a rare class action jury verdict on the ground that a significant portion of the class lacked Article III standing since they had never actually been injured by the defendant's conduct. Thus, the Supreme Court clarified that a class award cannot stand where significant portions of a class never actually experience any concrete injury.

What the Supreme Court did not clarify, however, is how this seemingly simple pronouncement affects the earlier stages of class litigation. While the Court made clear that a classwide verdict and damages award cannot stand when the class contains substantial numbers of uninjured members, it did not explain how lower courts should apply that holding at (for example) the class-certification stage.

Now, in the aftermath of TransUnion, federal courts are divided on a number of questions, such as when to conduct an Article III standing analysis, how searching that analysis should be done, and how many uninjured plaintiffs are too many.

Listen as our authoritative panel highlights the current legal landscape surrounding Article III standing in class actions--both before and after TransUnion. The panel will analyze recent federal court decisions grappling with the Court's pronouncement in TransUnion and offer practical approaches to leveraging TransUnion’s analysis at earlier stages in class litigation.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. The legal landscape pre-TransUnion
  2. The TransUnion decision
  3. Leveraging post-TransUnion authority to defeat class actions early on in litigation

Benefits

The panel will review these and other critical issues:

  • How has TransUnion affected the Article III standing analysis?
  • What is the current state of the law post-TransUnion?
  • When is a TransUnion challenge most appropriate?
  • How can class counsel develop effective strategies to leverage TransUnion in their litigation?

Faculty

Wyatt, Geoffrey
Geoffrey M. Wyatt
Partner
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom

Mr. Wyatt represents clients in mass tort and other aggregate litigation. He defends companies as part of a team that...  |  Read More

Schwartz, Jordan
Jordan M. Schwartz
Counsel
Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom

Mr. Schwartz represents clients in purported class actions, multidistrict litigation and mass tort proceedings in...  |  Read More

Access Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include course handouts.

To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

Download