Tag: Class Actions/UCL

SCOTUS Rules: Right or wrong, arbitrator’s interpretation stands

The United States Supreme Court in Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter held that an arbitration agreement in a fee-for-services contract between physicians and a health insurance company required arbitration of a class dispute arising under the contract….

Supreme Court Directs Trial Courts To Look At The Merits In Determining Whether To Certify A Class

By Michael A.S. Newman
Comcast v Behrend is the latest in a series of United States Supreme Court cases in recent years that have restricted the ability of plaintiffs to certify federal class actions. In so doing, it has expanded the scope of the Court…

Supreme Court Directs Trial Courts To Look At The Merits In Determining Whether To Certify A Class

By Michael A.S. Newman
Comcast v Behrend is the latest in a series of United States Supreme Court cases in recent years that have restricted the ability of plaintiffs to certify federal class actions. In so doing, it has expanded the scope of the Court…

Supreme Court Closes CAFA Loophole

By Larry Golub
A unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court has restored the integrity of the Class Action Fairness Act, or CAFA. At issue in Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles was the transparent attempt by a named plaintiff to ous…

Update: Approval Slated for $73 Million Settlement of Life Insurance Class Action Alleging Unlawful Rate Increase

United States District Judge Howard Matz of the Central District of California indicated yesterday that he would preliminarily approve a proposed $73 million settlement of a class action lawsuit against Conseco Life Insurance Company.
The case was file…

Approval Slated for $73 Million Settlement of Life Insurance Class Action Alleging Unlawful Rate Increase

United States District Judge Howard Matz of the Central District of California indicated yesterday that he would preliminarily approve a proposed $73 million settlement of a class action lawsuit against Conseco Life Insurance Company.
The case was file…

Insurer Has No Duty to Disclose Means of Obtaining Lower Premiums

In Levine v. Blue Shield of California, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District, Division One, unanimously held that a health insurer has no duty to advise an applicant concerning how coverage could be structured to obtain lowe…

California Supreme Court Holds Treble Damages Not Permitted under the Unfair Competition Law – Restitution is the Sole Monetary Remedy

Earlier today, the California Supreme Court issued its unanimous opinion concluding that Civil Code section 3345, which allows treble damages to be awarded to seniors when a statute provides for a fine or penalty, is not permitted under the Unfair Comp…