When Does A Class Action Claim Become Moot? Considerations and Strategies for Counsel After Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez

Analyzing Potential Approaches in Light of Unanswered Questions

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


Conducted on Tuesday, March 15, 2016

Recorded event now available

or call 1-800-926-7926
Program Materials

This CLE webinar will discuss the potential implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez on the use of Rule 68 offers of judgment and tenders in putative class actions, as well as strategies and considerations for class action counsel—both plaintiff and defense—going forward in light of the questions the Court both raised and did not address.

Description

On Jan. 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued the long-awaited Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez decision, which held that companies defending putative consumer class actions cannot moot a class action by making a complete Rule 68 settlement offer to the named plaintiff. The decision is noteworthy for what the Court said as well as the issues it left open.

The Court left open the possibility that a claim may become moot if actual funds are tendered to the plaintiff. The Court also did not address whether a plaintiff whose claim becomes moot can continue to represent the putative class or whether having an interest in representing a class is sufficient for a plaintiff to maintain standing. These questions abound among members of the class action plaintiff and defense bar.

In the wake of Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, will defense counsel discontinue the use of Rule 68 offers of judgment or tenders as a strategy to moot claims? Or will defense counsel attempt to pay the settlement amount to the named plaintiff as a way to avoid the impact of the Court’s holding? What are the remaining advantages of making a Rule 68 offer of judgment or tender? What is the significance of Justice Thomas’ statement in his concurring opinion that at common law, a defendant could only end a plaintiff’s case by tendering full monetary relief and admitting liability?

Listen as our authoritative panel of class litigators—both plaintiff and defense—discusses the anticipated impact of Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez on Rule 68 offers of judgment and tenders as a class action defense strategy.

READ MORE

Outline

  1. Rule 68 offers of judgment—overview and impact of Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, Genesis Healthcare and other relevant cases
  2. Strategic considerations for Rule 68 offers of judgment
    1. For defendants
    2. For plaintiffs
  3. Open roundtable discussion

Benefits

The panel will review these and other key issues:

  • What is the anticipated impact of the Supreme Court’s Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez ruling for defense counsel seeking to use Rule 68 offers of judgment or tenders to moot putative class actions?
  • What are some considerations for defense counsel evaluating whether to make an offer of judgment in putative class actions in the wake of the decision?
  • What are some strategic considerations for plaintiff’s counsel for anticipating and proactively dealing with offers of judgment?

Faculty

Jeffrey E. Crane
Jeffrey E. Crane

Founder
The Law Office of Jeffrey E. Crane

Mr. Crane has 22 years of experience working at major international law firms. His principal areas of practice include...  |  Read More

Irene C. Freidel
Irene C. Freidel

Partner
K&L Gates

Ms. Freidel has extensive experience in commercial litigation, including federal and state class action litigation. She...  |  Read More

Kathryn A. Honecker, Esq.
Kathryn A. Honecker, Esq.

Chair, Class Action Department
Rose Law Group

Ms. Honecker has fifteen years of class action experience and is chair of the firm’s Class Action department. Her...  |  Read More

Other Formats
— Anytime, Anywhere

Strafford will process CLE credit for one person on each recording. All formats include program handouts. To find out which recorded format will provide the best CLE option, select your state:

CLE On-Demand Video

$297

Download

$297