January 22, 2021
PLAC Member Ted Boutrous Named Top Lawyer of the Decade by Daily Journal
Theodore J. Boutrous Jr.
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Click here to read the full article
We are pleased to share with you the current version of the Doing Business In Brazil, drafted by Souto Correa Advogados, a full service law firm in Brazil. Please reach out to PLAC member Roberta Feiten with questions or if you would like more information.
“What Real Jurors Like/Dislike About Lawyers”
As courts are slowly resuming proceedings including some forms of jury trials, trial counsel, their trial teams, litigators generally and claims supervisors need to recalibrate their thinking about jurors.
J. Richard Caldwell, Jr.
If there is one lesson all trial lawyers have learned over the last year, it’s that life and the practice of law must go on, even in the face of upheavals affecting our profession. Depositions of corporate representative witnesses under Rule 30(b)(6), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is a prime example of how lawyers must learn to adapt to changing times and circumstances.
To read the full article, click here.
Dick Caldwell is a founding member of PLAC, and an active contributor to our Future of Jury Trials working group. Dick is also a founding partner of Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell, P.A., where he is currently Of Counsel in the firm’s Tampa, FL office. He was one of the first attorneys in Florida to become board-certified in Civil Trial Practice. Dick is engaged in civil trial and appellate practice, concentrating in the defense of product liability, insurance, professional liability, and commercial litigation. He has tried over 100 cases to verdict in state and federal courts across the country, and is a frequent author and presenter on the subject of products liability and other topics.
On February 8, 2021, PLAC filed a brief in the United States Supreme Court in Trans Union LLC v Sergio L Ramirez addressing the issue of whether either Article III or Rule 23 permits a damages class action where the vast majority of the class suffered no actual injury, let alone an injury anything like what the class representative suffered.
The Court granted review of a Ninth Circuit decision approving certification of a class of consumers who were provided copies of credit reports from Trans Union identifying the consumers as potential terrorists. Most of the reports had never been disclosed to anyone except the consumer, but the Named Plaintiff was denied credit in a public setting based on the incorrect information, and he cancelled a trip to Mexico out of fear he would be detained as a terrorist. As required by the trial court’s instructions, the jury awarded the same amount of damages to each class member.
In the Supreme Court, PLAC argues that the Ninth Circuit erred by holding that every class member had standing, and that the Named Plaintiff was typical of the class, simply because there was a “material risk” for all class members that the credit reports might one day be disclosed. Rather, a threatened injury must be “certainly impending” to constitute an injury in fact.
PLAC also argues that the Ninth Circuit erred by adopting a “least common denominator” approach to class certification, under which the typicality requirement is satisfied as long as at least one injury common to the class can be identified - in this case, the mere existence of inaccurate information in a credit report. This approach either denies due process to the defendant (because it is denied the opportunity to litigate the damage claims of less severely injured class members) or to class members (who are denied the opportunity to show they are more severely injured than the class representative). Besides, the issue of damages plainly was not common. If the absence of a class-wide measure of damages did not preclude class certification under Comcast, it at least required that damages be tried separately.
Oral argument is scheduled for March 30, 2021.
PLAC’s brief was authored by John M. Thomas of Dykema Gossett PLLC.
John M. Thomas
Dykema Gossett PLLC
PLAC is a specialty bar association focusing on complex litigation and regulatory issues in the area of product development and product liability. Our not-for-profit association of product manufacturers, suppliers, retailers and select regulatory, litigation and appellate professionals who work to shape the common law of product liability and complex regulation, provide guidance on changing regulations, and strategically help corporations manage risk throughout the entire product lifecycle. PLAC is a unique resource for companies who must defend their products’ integrity and their companies’ reputation.
PLAC's mission is to obtain fairness and balance in the common law of product liability. A primary tool to accomplish this mission is PLAC's Amicus Curiae Program, often called “The heart and soul of PLAC.”
PLAC has filed more than 1,100 amicus briefs, written by some of the nation’s top appellate practitioners. Our briefs have been accepted in virtually every state and federal court in the U.S. They are routinely acknowledged, quoted, and praised by courts in published opinions.
PLAC’s amicus briefs help shape the law for all manufacturers on important issues.
Fall 2021 Conference: PLAC's Fall Conference will be held at the Broadmoor, September 29-October 1, 2021 in Colorado Springs, CO.
Tuesday, March 2 at 3:00 PM ET: The COVID-Era Juror: Attitudes, Implications, and Strategies
Questions? Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Connect with us on LinkedIn