Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: April 3, 2013
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a key decision on class-action lawsuits. The case, Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles, involved the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA), which gives federal district courts original jurisdiction over class actions in which the matter in controversy exceeds $5 million in sum or value.
The law aims to ensure that large class-action lawsuits are decided in federal court and to deter abuse of the class-action process in state courts. To accomplish this goal, when more than $5 million is at stake, the CAFA allows class actions to be removed to federal court, giving defendants the benefit of federal procedural protections.
The Facts of the Case
The question before the Supreme Court was whether a corporate defendant can be forced to litigate in state court if the plaintiff offers a stipulation purporting to waive any recovery above the $5 million threshold on behalf of not only the named plaintiff but any future class members.
In Standard Fire Insurance Co v. Knowles, the complaint was accompanied by an affidavit that included the following language: “I do not now, and will not at any time during this case, whether it be removed, remanded, or otherwise . . . seek damages for the class as alleged in the complaint to which this stipulation is attached in excess of $5,000,000 in the aggregate (inclusive of costs and attorneys’ fees). I understand that this stipulation is binding, and it is my intent to be bound by it.”
The Supreme Court’s Decision
In a unanimous opinion, the justices concluded that the stipulation stating that the class would seek less than five million dollars in damages did not defeat federal jurisdiction under the CAFA.
As explained by the Court in a brief opinion, the precertification stipulation can tie Knowles’ hands because stipulations are binding on the party who makes them. However, it cannot legally bind members of the proposed class before the class is certified. “Because Knowles lacked authority to concede the amount in controversy for absent class members, the District Court wrongly concluded that his stipulation could overcome its finding that the CAFA jurisdictional threshold had been met,” the Court concluded.
The decision is good news for businesses. Groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, had argued that allowing damages stipulations to defeat federal jurisdiction would encourage the same forum-shopping that Congress intended to stop by enacting CAFA.
If you have any questions about this case or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Christine Vanek, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Secured transactions form the backbone of a wide range of business dealings, including business loans, mortgages, and inventory financing. Because the stakes are often high and relatively minor oversights can have drastic consequences, lenders and borrowers should thoroughly understand how to form an enforceable security agreement that protects their legal rights. What Is a Secured […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Cashing a check marked “paid in full” can be a risky endeavor, particularly if you don’t fully understanding the legal implications. If you are owed more than the amount of the check you accept and deposit, you may waive your right to collect the full disputed amount. That is why you should consider either rejecting […]
Author: Dan Brecher
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025 (OBBBA) significantly impacts federal taxes, credits, and deductions. A key change relating to Qualified Small Business Stock (QSBS) allows greater tax-free gains for investments in startups and other qualifying small businesses. Company founders and other investors should understand how the enhanced tax strategy works or risk missing […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Corporate consolidation involves two or more businesses merging to become a single larger entity. The result is often a stronger and more competitive company that can better navigate today’s competitive marketplace. What Is Corporate Consolidation? Corporate consolidation closely resembles a basic merger transaction. The primary difference is that a consolidation creates an entirely new business […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Business law plays a critical role in nearly every aspect of running a successful enterprise, from negotiating a commercial lease to drafting employee policies to fulfilling corporate disclosure obligations. Understanding what is business law and your legal obligations can help your business run smoothly and build productive relationships with clients, business partners, regulators, and others. […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Corporate transactions can have significant implications for a corporation and its stakeholders. For deals to be successful, companies must act strategically to maximize value and minimize risk. It is also important to fully understand the legal and financial ramifications of corporate transactions, both in the near and long term. Understanding Corporate Transactions The term “corporate […]
Author: Dan Brecher
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!