Klonoff on Rule 23(f) Class-Certification Appeals

In Elegant Massage, LLC v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., a divided Fourth Circuit reviewed—and reversed—the denial of a motion dismiss while hearing a class-certification appeal under Rule 23(f). The majority thought it could do so because the class-certification and motion-to-dismiss decisions were “so interconnected as to require concurrent review.”…

In Cheapside Minerals, Ltd. v. Devon Energy Production Co., the Fifth Circuit held that a remand under the Class Action Fairness Act’s local-controversy rule was an appealable final decision under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. That meant the appellant did not need to resort to a discretionary appeal under 28 U.S.C.…

In National ATM Council, Inc. v. Visa, Inc., the D.C. Circuit offered a rare explanation for granting a petition to appeal a class-certification grant under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f). The reasons given were particularly interesting.…

In Harris v. Medical Transportation Management, Inc., the D.C. Circuit reviewed (and reversed) a grant of class certification. But it refused to use pendent appellate jurisdiction to review certification of a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The court explained that class actions and collective actions “are fundamentally different creatures.”…

The Class Action Fairness Act (often referred to as “CAFA”) permits the removal of certain class actions brought in state court. CAFA includes a special appellate provision—28 U.S.C. § 1453(c)(1)—which gives the courts of appeals discretion to review a district court order “granting or denying a motion to remand a class action to the State court from which it was removed.”…

I’m thrilled to announce the creation of Final Decisions PLLC, an appellate boutique and consultancy focused on appellate jurisdiction. Through it, I hope to partner with lawyers facing complex appellate-jurisdiction issues.

Almost six years ago, I started the Final Decisions blog as a way to keep on top of developments in the world of appellate jurisdiction.…

In New Albany Main Street Properties v. Watco Companies, LLC, the Sixth Circuit held that it could not review a decision granting leave to amend as part of a qualified-immunity appeal. The leave-to-amend decision was not itself immediately appealable. Nor could it tag along with the denial of immunity (which technically involved qualified immunity under Kentucky law).…

In Ashley v. Clay County, the Fifth Circuit held that a municipal defendant could appeal a district court’s refusal to resolve an immunity defense despite the district court’s ordering arbitration.…

Courts sometimes suggest that would-be appellants must establish appellate standing by showing that the appealed decision injured the would-be appellant. When the appealing party cannot show this injury, these courts think that they have lost Article III jurisdiction.

But as a recent opinion from the D.C. Circuit’s Judge Pillard explained, that’s not quite right.…

In Silverthorne Seismic, L.L.C. v. Sterling Seismic Services, Ltd., a majority of the Fifth Circuit held that a motions panel had erred in permitting a certified appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). The district court had certified for an immediate appeal a decision on how the plaintiffs could prove reasonable-royalty damages in a trade-secret case.…