<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="0.92">
<channel>
	<title>Impact Litigation Journal</title>
	<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com</link>
	<description>Observations and asides about California representative actions and other complex litigation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 May 2013 23:45:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss092</docs>
	<language>en</language>
	<!-- generator="WordPress" -->

	<item>
		<title>Bank of America Agrees to Another Massive Settlement Related to Countrywide Acquisition</title>
		<description><![CDATA[It has been said that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. For Bank of America, its acquisition of Countrywide has been a persistent melding of farce and tragedy. Earlier this year, Bank of America agreed to pay $11.6 and $8.5 billion to settle, respectively, with Fannie Mae (over mortgage-backed derivative investments) and the [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/20/bank-of-america-agrees-to-another-massive-settlement-related-to-countrywide-acquisition/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Faulkinbury v. Boyd &amp; Associates: California Appellate Court Reverses Denial of Certification</title>
		<description><![CDATA[California’s Court of Appeal continues to articulate a measured, well-reasoned class action jurisprudence, most recently by taking a second look at its own order affirming a trial court’s denial of class certification. See Faulkinbury v. Boyd &#38; Assocs., Inc., ___ Cal. Rptr. 3d ___ (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (slip opinion available here). In the underlying [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/17/faulkinbury-v-boyd-associates-california-appellate-court-reverses-denial-of-certification/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Closing Arguments in Major Banks’ Arbitration Collusion Trial</title>
		<description><![CDATA[For some companies, apparently even the famously liberal policy favoring arbitration isn’t enough of an assurance that they can avoid defending a consumer class action in court. Or so the plaintiffs in an antitrust bench trial pending in federal court in New York’s Southern District have posited, pointing to 28 meetings between 1999 and 2003, [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/15/closing-arguments-in-major-banks%e2%80%99-arbitration-collusion-trial/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Bluford v. Safeway: California Appellate Court Reverses Denial of Class Certification</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a win for employees seeking to remedy broad, systematic employer violations of workplace protections, California’s intermediate appellate court has reversed a trial court judge’s denial of class certification. Bluford v. Safeway Stores, Inc., No. C066074 (Cal. Ct. App. May 8, 2013) (slip opinion available here). Focusing on the often-decisive predominance requirement for class certification, [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/13/bluford-v-safeway-california-appellate-court-reverses-denial-of-class-certification/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Jury Returns Record $240 Million Disability Verdict in EEOC Suit</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Responding to allegations that Henry’s Turkey (an Iowa-based subsidiary of Hill County Farms) subjected a class of intellectually disabled workers to verbal abuse and deprivation of rights, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought suit for discrimination against the turkey processor in 2011 (read the complaint here). The EEOC lawsuit was brought under [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/10/jury-returns-record-240-disability-verdict-in-eeoc-suit/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Fannie Mae Settles Securities Fraud Class Action for $153 Million</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Federal National Mortgage Association, better known as Fannie Mae, and Big Four accounting firm KPMG have agreed to pay $153 million to settle a securities class action that has been litigated over the past eight years. The class members are Fannie Mae shareholders, chiefly large institutional investors and pension plans. The complaint alleges that [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/08/fannie-mae-settles-securities-fraud-class-action-for-153-million/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Both Sides Rebuffed in Netflix Closed Captioning Fee Dispute</title>
		<description><![CDATA[Donald Cullen, a deaf college student, filed suit against Netflix over alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California’s Disabled Persons and Unruh Civil Rights Acts, claiming that Netflix failed to provide adequate closed captioning and made misleading statements about the availability of closed captioning in Netflix’s streaming movies and TV shows. [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/06/both-sides-rebuffed-in-netflix-closed-captioning-fee-dispute/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>In re Vertrue Inc.: Sixth Circuit Holds American Pipe Tolling Properly Applied to Later-Filed Class Actions</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The Sixth Circuit has issued a counterweight to the recent spate of anti-class-action decisions coming from federal courts. In In re: Vertrue Inc., a three-judge panel held that the statute of limitations for the claims of putative class members may be tolled in a subsequent class action when there was no ruling on class certification [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/03/in-re-vertrue-inc-sixth-circuit-holds-american-pipe-tolling-properly-applied-to-later-filed-class-actions/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>Ninth Circuit Strikes $45 Million Settlement Due To Standard $5,000 Payments to Class Reps</title>
		<description><![CDATA[In a ruling likely to be as unpopular with defendants wishing to settle class actions as with the plaintiffs’ bar, the Ninth Circuit has found fault with modest $5,000 incentive payments to the four named plaintiffs/class representatives in a class action alleging that credit agencies erroneously included debts discharged through bankruptcy in the settling class [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/05/01/ninth-circuit-strikes-45-million-settlement-due-to-standard-5000-payments-to-class-reps/</link>
			</item>
	<item>
		<title>In re Neurontin: First Circuit Issues Decision With Sensible View of Aggregate Evidence</title>
		<description><![CDATA[The First Circuit has issued a critical decision both in its ultimate ruling and its reasoning. See In re: Neurontin Marketing &#38; Sales Practices Litig., No. 11-1806 (1st Cir. Apr. 3, 2013) (slip opinion available here). In a decision written by Chief Judge Sandra Lynch, the unanimous three-judge panel reversed the district court’s grant of [...]]]></description>
		<link>http://www.impactlitigation.com/2013/04/29/in-re-neurontin-first-circuit-issues-decision-with-sensible-view-of-aggregate-evidence/</link>
			</item>
</channel>
</rss>
