In a 5-4 decision issued on 28 May 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that the federal removal statute does not permit a third-party counterclaim defendant to remove a class action from state court to federal court. This decision prevents a defendant sued by way of a third-party counterclaim in state court from litigating in federal court notwithstanding the Class Action Fairness Act’s (CAFA) broad language allowing “any defendant” to remove a class action…

Introduction An Inquiry currently underway in Australia offers good insights into whether, and if so in what circumstances, third party litigation funding, particularly of class actions, should be permitted. Traditionally, third party litigation funding has been prohibited in many countries, and there has been resistance to proposals for its introduction or expansion.  Litigation funding has been permitted in Australia for some time, however.  The experience there, as reviewed in the current Inquiry and summarised in…

The D.C. Circuit recently ruled that alleged victims of a data breach have standing to pursue claims, notwithstanding that they have not yet suffered any actual harm as a result of the breach.  This ruling adds to the prior circuit court rulings that have reached differing results when addressing the standing issue in data breach cases.

Attias v. CareFirst, Inc., presented a regrettably familiar fact pattern:  Plaintiffs were the victims of an alleged data breach at health insurer CareFirst, which exposed their personal and medical data.  Plaintiffs filed a class action against CareFirst raising eleven state law causes of action on behalf of a class of all CareFirst customers in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C.