The attorneys in Maynard's Class Action Litigation group have successfully defended hundreds of class actions across the country in both federal and state court. Our attorneys have litigated a wide variety of class actions, including the following:

  • Insurance
  • Consumer Finance
  • Environmental Torts
  • Products Liability
  • Telecommunications
  • Antitrust
  • RICO
  • Airlines
  • Labor
  • Education

Maynard has prevailed in a significant number of these class action cases by aggressively filing motions to deny class certification or motions to strike the class action allegations after a class action complaint is filed, or by defeating motions for class certification. Our attorneys also have successfully defended class actions by filing motions to dismiss on the merits or by obtaining summary judgment. Our attorneys have been responsible for obtaining a number of favorable decisions from Alabama circuit courts and the Alabama Supreme Court, as well as from federal district and circuit courts around the country and the Eleventh Circuit, on class certification and merits issues. The firm has also been involved in settling class actions both before and after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Amchem Products v. Windsor. We are well-versed in all areas of the class action practice under both the Federal and State version of Rule 23.

Maynard’s Approach to Class Action Litigation

A class action suit is often part of a concerted litigation attack against a company. Maynard works with its clients to develop the appropriate approach to a class action suit that is consistent with the client’s goals. At times, a client may want to defeat class certification and defeat the claims of the individual plaintiffs. At other times, a client may want to use a class action settlement as a vehicle to resolve certain claims. Rather than pursuing a single, uniform approach in connection with the defense of all class actions, our attorneys work closely with clients to develop a creative strategy for handling class action litigation.

Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”)

The defense of every class action filed in state court begins with an analysis of whether such action can and should be removed to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act ("CAFA"). Our attorneys have successfully removed numerous state court class actions to federal court under CAFA. We have been on the cutting edge with arguments defeating motions to remand based on the local controversy and home state exceptions.

Experience

Representative Matters

  • Representing Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alabama in consolidated class actions against all Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans nationwide for alleged violations of the Sherman Act, which is the second largest class action in federal history, judged by class size, and the largest antitrust class action ever: In re Blue Cross Blue Shield Antitrust Litigation, 2:13–CV–20000–RDP (N.D. Ala.)
  • Serving as lead counsel to the target defendant in a putative nationwide class action alleging breach of warranty and negligence in connection with the production of manufactured homes that contain certain alleged structural defects: BMTP v. Southern Energy Homes, No. 2:19-CV-177-RDP (N.D. Ala.)

Dismissal of Case or Class Action Allegations at Pre-certification Stage

Maynard has been successful in obtaining the dismissal of entire cases or of class action allegations prior to the class certification stage. We have worked creatively in developing a variety of methods to dispose of cases before the class certification stage including the following cases:

  • Granting motions to dismiss in nationwide COVID-19 related Business Interruption insurance coverage class actions filed in various states across the country seeking (1) certification of multiple classes of business owners arising out of business interruption and civil authority insurance coverage disputes and (2) damages for breach of contract and bad faith claims handling: Roy H. Johnson, DDS and Windy Hill Dentistry, LLC v Hartford Financial Services Group, et al., No. 1:20‐CV‐02000‐SDG (N.D. Ga. 2020); Karmel Davis and Assocs., LLC v. Hartford Financial Services Group, et al., No. 1:20‐CV‐02181‐WMR (N.D. Ga. 2020); Pure Fitness, LLC v. Hartford Financial Services Group, et al., No.2:20‐CV‐00775‐JHE (N.D. Ala. 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative class action of visually-impaired students alleging website was inaccessible and unlawful under the ADA: Gomez v. Miami International University of Art & Design, Inc., 2022 WL 1773883 (S.D. Fla. June 1, 2022)
  • Granting judgment on the pleadings dismissing unfair-competition and declaratory-judgment claims and motion to dismiss amended unfair-competition claim in putative class action alleging violations of California statutes when terminating life-insurance policies for non-payment of premium: Grundstrom v. Wilco Life Ins. Co., No. 20-cv-03445-MMC, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 69944, 2022 BL 131735 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 15, 2022); Grundstrom v. Wilco Life Ins. Co., No. 20-cv-03445-MMC, 2022 WL 2390992 (N.D. Cal. July 1, 2022).
  • Granting in part motion to dismiss consolidated class action complaint in MDL proceeding arising from a healthcare data breach implicating 1.3 million patients: In re: Mednax Services, Inc. Custom Data Security Breach Litigation, 2022 WL 1468057, ___ F.Supp. 3d ___ (S.D. Fla. May 10, 2022)
  • Reversing district court and granting motion to strike class-action allegations in putative class action alleging securities fraud: Donelson v. Ameriprise Fin. Servs., Inc., 999 F.3d 1080 (8th Cir. 2021)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative class action alleging denial of coverage violating federal and state law: M.F. v. Magellan Healthcare, Inc., 2021 WL 1121042 (N.D. Ill. March 24, 2021)
  • Granting judgment on the pleadings that insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify policyholder in putative class action for alleged violation of Driver’s Privacy Protection Act: Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Gelshenen, 387 F. Supp. 3d 634 (W.D.N.C. 2019), aff’d sub nom. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. Davis & Gelshenen, LLP, 801 F. App’x 915 (4th Cir. 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss in separately filed class actions after successfully removing cases to federal court and convincing plaintiff’s counsel the court lacked personal jurisdiction over defendant: MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC v. Ameriprise Ins. Co., No. 1:17‐CV‐24033 & 1:17‐CV‐23980 (S.D. Fla. 2018)
  • Granting in part partial motion to dismiss a putative nationwide class action alleging breach of contract relating to Cost of Insurance charges for universal life insurance policies: Advance Trust & Life Escrow Services, LTA v. Protective Life Insurance Company, 2020 WL 2198955 (N.D. Ala. May 6, 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss with prejudice putative class action by residents of a manufactured housing community alleging six statutory and common law claims based on various state laws and the governing contract relating to water usage by the resident: Alenci v. Hometown America Management, LLC, 2020 WL 2515872 (D. Mass. May 15, 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative class action alleging violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act when processing plaintiff’s loan application: Trites v. 21st Mortg. Corp., 2020 WL 1531773 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 31, 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative nationwide class action as to plaintiffs’ negligence claims and as to Louisiana plaintiffs’ breach of implied warranty claims: BMTP, LLC v. RBH, Inc., 2020 WL 6875827 (N.D. Ala. March 5, 2020)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative class action alleging that defendants improperly charged United Airline pilots “smoker” premium rates on variable universal life insurance policies, despite the pilots not using tobacco: Miller v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 2019 WL 4450637 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 17, 2019), aff’d 979 F.3d, 118 (2d Cir. Oct. 29, 2020)
  • Obtained a voluntary dismissal with prejudice after conducting limited discovery in putative multi-state class action alleging violation of insurance policy by depreciating the replacement cost value for labor costs associated with repairs to dwellings: Lovelace v. Ameriprise Auto & Home Ins. Agency, Inc., No. 4:19-CV-150-JM (E. D. Ark. 2019)
  • Granting motion to dismiss on SLUSA grounds in putative class action alleging failure to include certain notices to senior citizens on the cover page of variable annuities in violation of California statutes: Davis v. RiverSource Life Ins. Co., No. 4:16-CV-02801-JSW (N.D. Cal. 2018)
  • Granting motion to dismiss putative class action alleging improper reduction of settlement offers by taking into account prior MedPay benefits: Archuleta v. USAA Casualty Ins. Co., 2017 WL 3157947 (D. Colo. July 25, 2017) aff’d 896 F.3d 1166 (10th Cir. 2018)
  • Granting motion to dismiss purported nationwide class action alleging common law and statutory claims relating to valuation in IRAs of non-publicly traded REITs: Lewis v. Delaware Charter Guarantee & Trust Co., 2015 WL 1476403 (E.D.N.Y. March 31, 2015), aff’d, 642 Fed. Appx. 23 (2d Cir. March 14, 2016)
  • Granting in part defendants’ motions to dismiss federal antitrust law claims and state law claims alleged in purported nationwide class actions by Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs, Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs, and Consumer Plaintiffs: In re Cast Iron Soil Pipe and Fittings Antitrust Litigation, 2015 WL 5166014 (E.D. Tenn. Sept. 24, 2015)
  • Granting defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of named plaintiff’s individual claim in purported class action alleging RICO and common law claims and rejecting plaintiff’s challenge to class action waiver provision: Lee v. Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., 2015 WL 4619806 (N.D. Ala. July 31, 2015)
  • Granting motion to strike plaintiffs’ class action allegations before initiation of class discovery: Kraetsch v. USAA, 2015 WL 1457015 (E.D. Mo. March 30, 2015)
  • Granting defendants’ motion to dismiss purported ERISA class action relating to an Employee Stock Ownership Plan: Wright v. Harrison, No.: 5:13-cv-00332-HLH (W.D. Tex. July 25, 2013)
  • Granting dismissal of class action claims in a case where the students’ claims against a for-profit educational institution were successfully compelled to arbitration and the court ruled that the students waived class action adjudication pursuant to the arbitration provision: Asbell v. Education Affiliates, Inc., et al., No. 3:12-CV-00579 (M.D. Tenn. April 25, 2013)
  • Granting defendant’s motion to strike plaintiff’s nationwide class action allegations: Lawson v. Life of the South Insurance Company, 286 F.R.D. 689 (M.D. Ga. Sept. 28, 2012), denying plaintiff’s Rule 23(f) petition for permission to appeal, No. 12-90036-A (11th Cir. Dec. 7, 2012)
  • Granting dismissal of purported nationwide class action where the student’s individual state law claims against for-profit educational institution were successfully compelled to arbitration and court dismissed with prejudice the student’s class claims and federal claims under the Higher Education Act: Daniels v. Virginia College at Jackson, No. 3:11-CV-496 (S.D. Miss. Nov. 29, 2011), aff’d , 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13037 (5th Cir. June 26, 2012)
  • Granting defendants’ motion to dismiss purported class action against asset managers in litigation involving Alabama’s prepaid college tuition program: McVeigh v. Callan Associates, 2012 WL 1155783 (N.D. Ala. March 26, 2012)
  • Affirming district court order granting defendants’ motion to dismiss purported nationwide class action asserting breach of warranty claim: Green v. Bissell Homecare, Inc., 476 F. App’x 238 (11th Cir. 2012)
  • Granting defendant’s motion to dismiss purported nationwide class action seeking rescission of old Southwest Airlines “Rapid Rewards” drink coupons that contained no expiration date: Grimsley v. Southwest Airlines Co., 2012 WL 1339722 (N.D. Ala. April 17, 2012), aff’d, Baxley v. Southwest Airlines Co., 491 Fed. Appx. 146 (11th Cir. 2012)
  • Affirming district court order granting defendant’s motion to dismiss purported nationwide class asserting claims for denial of benefits under catastrophic medical insurance policy: Metz v. United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York, 662 F.3d 600 (2d Cir. Dec. 8, 2011)
  • Granting defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiffs' remaining claims in 412(i) purported nationwide class action: Berry v. Indianapolis Life Insurance Company; American General, et al., 2011 WL 3555869 (N.D. Tex. Aug. 11, 2011)
  • Granting defendants’ motion to dismiss in RESPA purported nationwide class action: Davis v. Home Buyers Warranty Corporation, 2011 WL 3489886 (N.D. Ala. Aug. 8, 2011)
  • Granting defendants’ motion to compel arbitration as to individual claims of named plaintiffs in purported class action and staying action pending arbitration proceedings: Hafer v. Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc., 793 F.Supp.2d 987 (S.D. Tex. June 24, 2011)
  • Granting defendants’ motions to dismiss in purported nationwide class action involving major medical plan: Schandler v. New York Life Insurance Co.; U.S. Life; Hadassah, 2011 WL 1642574 (S.D.N.Y. April 26, 2011)
  • Granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff’s tort claims and claims for attorneys’ fees and punitive damages in purported nationwide class action by insureds seeking refunds of alleged unearned premiums for credit life insurance/credit disability insurance following early loan payoffs: Bishop v. Protective Life Insurance Co., 597 F. Supp. 2d 1354 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 6, 2009)
  • In 412(i) purported nationwide class action, granting motion to dismiss 24 plaintiffs for lack of standing, dismissing certain counts with prejudice, and dismissing all other counts as to 10 remaining plaintiffs without prejudice to repleading those counts: Berry v. Indianapolis Life Insurance Company, 608 F. Supp. 2d 785 (N.D. Tex. 2009)
  • Granting defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings prior to discovery in purported nationwide consumer class action seeking refunds of GAP payments following early loan payoffs: Massih v. Jim Morgan & Associates, Inc., 542 F. Supp. 2d 1324 (M.D. Ga. March 28, 2008), aff’d, 2008 WL 4946213 (11th Cir. Nov. 20, 2008)
  • Granting motion to dismiss purported nationwide class action by insureds involving alleged failure to refund unearned premiums on credit life insurance/credit disability insurance based on plaintiff’s lack of Article III standing: Holoway v. Protective Life Insurance Co., 2007 WL 2904162 (M.D. Ga. Oct. 3, 2007)
  • Granting defendants’ motions to dismiss in purported nationwide class actions alleging improper pricing and disclosures in “bonus annuity” sales: Phillips v. American Int’l Group, Inc., 498 F. Supp. 2d 690 (S.D.N.Y. 2007); Delaney v. American Express Co., 2007 WL 1420766 (D.N.J. May 11, 2007)
  • Won dismissal on summary judgment of “juvenile smoker” life insurance class action claims: Thompson v. American General, 404 F. Supp. 2d 1023 (M.D. Tenn. 2005); Thompson v. American General, 448 F. Supp. 2d 885 (M.D. Tenn. 2006)
  • Dismissal of nationwide consumer class action alleging failure to refund an unearned premium for credit life and/or credit disability insurance based on forum non conveniens: Keith Dube v. North Central Life Insurance Company, Civil Action No. 62-C805153 (District Court of Ramsey County, Minnesota 2005)
  • Settlement of purported class action on individual basis three years after multi-day class certification evidentiary hearing involving alleged statewide class of water supply systems: Limestone County Water Authority v. Shell Civil Action No.:1999-361 (Circuit Court of Limestone County, Alabama 2005)
  • Dismissal of statewide consumer class action against Kia Motors America, Inc. based on plaintiff’s lack of standing and lack of a case or controversy: Lynn v. Kia Motors America, Inc., No. CV-2003-412-JPS (Circuit Court of Madison County, Alabama July 25, 2003)
  • Dismissal of nationwide class action on grounds that plaintiff had suffered no injury in fact because none of the purchased coverage had been canceled or modified: Burkhalter Transport v. AIG Aviation, Civil Action No. 1:02CV109-M-D (N.D. Miss. 2002)
  • Removal and dismissal under SLUSA of securities class action alleging improper sales of Class B shares of mutual funds: Behlen v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc., 311 F.3d 1087 (11th Cir. 2002)
  • Obtained Alabama Supreme Court order granting mandamus petition requiring an Alabama trial judge to stay a purported class action pending the certification decision in a previously-filed similar class action in a different forum: Ex parte The BOC Group, Inc., 823 So. 2d 1270 (Ala. 2001)
  • Granting of motion for judgment on the pleadings of nationwide consumer class action asserting claims based on American General Life Insurance Company’s cash surrender policies and procedures
  • Dismissal of consumer class action against U-Haul on grounds that there was no private cause of action for alleged improper sale of insurance without a license
  • Dismissal of nationwide consumer class action alleging breach of membership agreement against Movie Gallery
  • Dismissal by federal district court of putative Rule 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3) consumer class action alleging that out-of-state retailer charged sales tax on shipping and handling charges in violation of state and federal law
  • Dismissal (for lack of subject matter jurisdiction) of a nationwide class action against a national tax services company arising out of its “Peace of Mind” program
  • Removal of three lawsuits filed against a major securities firm in Mississippi state court on behalf of plaintiffs and “similarly situated persons” (Mississippi does not have a class action rule comparable to FRCP 23), which were subsequently transferred to a MDL proceeding and ultimately dismissed under SLUSA
  • Dismissal of consumer class action against a national rental car company on grounds that there was no private cause of action for alleged improper sale of insurance products without a state insurance license

Compelling Arbitration

Maynard has successfully defeated class actions by compelling arbitration against named plaintiffs before the class certification stage, including the following cases:

  • Reversing district court and granting motion to compel arbitration as to named plaintiffs in putative class action alleging securities fraud: Donelson v. Ameriprise Fin. Servs., Inc., 999 F.3d 1080 (8th Cir. 2021)
  • Granting motion to compel arbitration as to named plaintiff in putative class action alleging breach of contract and tort claims: Garcia v. Willis Stein & Partners, LLC, et al., 2019 WL 13149917 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 5, 2019)
  • Granting motion to compel arbitration as to named plaintiff in putative class action alleging RICO and common law claims and rejecting plaintiff’s challenge to class action waiver provision: Lee v. Comcast Cable Communications, Inc., 2015 WL 4619806 (N.D. Ala. July 31, 2015)
  • Granting motion to compel arbitration as to individual claims of named plaintiffs in putative class action alleging fraud and violations of state law: Hafer v. Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc., 793 F.Supp.2d 987 (S.D. Tex. June 24, 2011)

Denial of Class Certification

Maynard has been successful in obtaining court orders denying class certification in a variety of contexts including the following:

  • Denying plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in action challenging the rent structures in two manufactured home communities: Bartok v. Hometown America, LLC, No. 21-CV-10790-LTS (D. Mass. March 30, 2022)
  • Denying class certification and granting motion to dismiss in putative class action alleging systematic denial or reduction of insurance coverage: Crosby v. California Physicians’ Service, et al., 2020 WL 6535790 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2020)
  • Retained after trial court granted class certification. On appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal of Florida reversed certification, holding that (1) plaintiff lacked standing at the inception of the case due to faulty assignments and (2) plaintiff failed to establish that common issues predominate over individual issues based on the inherently unique nature of claims under Florida’s Motor Vehicle No-Fault Law: IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company v. MSPA Claims 1, LLC, 263 So.3d 122 (Fla. 3d DCA. May 23, 2017)
  • Reversing trial court’s order certifying a nationwide class action in data breach case [our law firm was first engaged after the trial court’s class certification order was entered and appeal notice was filed]: Bliss & Glennon, Inc. v. Ashley, 420 S.W. 3d 379 (Tex. App. – Hous. (1 Dist.), Jan. 7, 2014)
  • Denial of class certification in case brought by emergency room physicians alleging breach of preferred provider contracts: Williamson v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Ala., Civil Action No. 10-900303 (Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Ala., August 29, 2011)
  • Denial of class certification of nationwide class of insureds in credit life insurance/credit disability insurance unearned premium litigation: Bishop v. Protective Life Insurance Co., 255 F.R.D. 619 (M.D. Ga. Feb. 9, 2009)
  • Denial of class certification of multi-state class action alleging products liability claims relating to trailers sold to FEMA and provided to residents after Hurricane Katrina: In re FEMA Trailer Formaldehyde Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 07-1873, 2008 WL 5423488 (E.D. La. Dec. 29, 2008)
  • Denial of class certification as to alleged “statistically discriminatory” life insurance policies: In re American General Life and Accident Insurance Company, MDL No. 1429, C/A 3:01-5000 (D.S.C. March 9, 2007) (“Hunter II”); the Hunter I and Hunter II decisions were rare class action victories for the life insurance industry in the race-based premium litigation; the Fifth Circuit, several federal district courts, and state courts had essentially ruled that a class should be certified in race-based premium litigation against other life insurance companies
  • Denial of class certification for a nationwide class by former customers alleging “overt discrimination” in race-based life insurance premiums in a MDL proceeding against American General Life and Accident Insurance Company: Hunter v. American General Life and Accident Insurance Company, 2004 WL 5231631 (D.S.C. Dec. 2, 2004), aff’d, 2006 WL 3267346 (4th Cir. Nov. 13, 2006) (“Hunter I”)
  • Denial of class certification in a nationwide class action against a national tax services company arising out of its Refund Anticipation Loan program: Inez Brown, et al. v. H&R Block, Inc., et al., case number 7:93-cv-749 (N.D. Ala), order (not published) entered April 25, 1994 (Clemon, J.)
  • Reversal of trial court order granting class certification against U-Haul in case alleging improper assessment of rental taxes: U-Haul of Alabama, Inc. v. Johnson, 893 So. 2d 307 (Ala. 2004)
  • Denial of class certification for a putative class of businesses, municipalities and individuals claiming airborne particulate pollution and property damages against Continental Carbon Corporation: Action Marine v. Continental Carbon Co. (M.D. Ala)
  • Denial of class certification for a nationwide class by customers alleging false statements by a research analyst against Morgan Keegan

Class Action Settlements

Maynard has worked with clients in developing innovative class action settlements in a variety of cases including the following:

  • Favorable settlement of class action alleging state law claims involving stormwater management and damage issues in manufactured home community: Craw v. Hometown America, LLC, No. 18-12149-LTS (D. Mass. Sept. 23, 2021)
  • Favorable settlement of putative nationwide class action after filing a motion to compel individual arbitration and strike class allegations: Joanne Bustillos v. Randall-Reilly, LLC, No. 7:21-CV-00900-LSC (N.D. Ala. July 1, 2021)
  • Favorable settlement of consolidated class action proceedings brought pursuant to federal antitrust laws: In re Ductile Iron Pipe Fittings Direct Purchaser and Indirect Purchaser Antitrust Litigation, No. 12-CV-711 (AET)(LHG), 2018 WL 2722457 (D.N.J. 2018)
  • Favorable settlement of class action alleging improper denial of policyholders’ waiver of life insurance premium claims: Laster v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co., No. 2:17-CV-00851-ABJEM (C.D. Cal. 2017)
  • Settlement of purported class action against 37 underwriters alleging violations of the Securities Act in connection with the sale of securities for Colonial BankGroup: 2015 WL 10889904 (N.D. Ala Mar. 13, 2015)
  • Settlement of nationwide Rule 23(b)(3) class action against airline company relating to Business Select fares and their associated drink coupons based on a claims made settlement providing issuance of replacement coupons: Levitt v. Southwest Airlines, Co., No. 1:11-cv-08176 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 26, 2013). The settlement was affirmed despite the appeal of objectors. In re Southwest Airlines Voucher Litig. Malone v. Southwest Airlines Co., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14601 (7th Cir. Aug. 20, 2015)
  • Settlement of claims in action under Securities Exchange Act relating to alleged misstatements in loan loss reserves and goodwill accounting: 2015 WL 5608096 (N.D. Ala. Sept. 14, 2015)
  • Settlement of consolidated nationwide class actions involving closed-end investment companies and alleging claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934: In re Regions Morgan Keegan Closed-End Fund Litigation, No. 07-cv-02830 SHM (W.D. Tenn. 2013)
  • Settlement of multi-state Rule 23(b)(3) class action involving products liability claims against manufactured housing defendants. In re FEMA Trailer Formaldehyde Products Liability Litigation, MDL 07-1873 (E.D. La. Sept. 27, 2012)
  • Rule 23(b)(2) mandatory no opt-out class action settlement of local pharmacies’ claims related to reimbursement formulas for brand name drugs. Pharmacy Xpress, Inc. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Ala., No. 05-125 (Circuit Court of Tallapoosa County, Ala., Sept. 29, 2011)
  • Settlement of multi-county toxic tort property damage class action against industrial clients that included both cash payments and an innovative value assurance program that allowed past and current property owners to obtain additional cash payments if they sold their properties for less than fair market value because of the environmental conditions allegedly caused by the defendants: Almon v. McWane, CV 04-1112 (Circuit Court of Calhoun County, Alabama, 2010)
  • Settlement of nationwide Rule 23(b)(3) class action against a credit repair company based on a claims made settlement providing free credit repair services for a limited period of time and e-mail notice to the class: Gilbert v. Ovation Law, PA, CV-06-900001 (Circuit Court of Fayette County, Alabama, Oct. 22, 2007)
  • Rule 23(b)(1)(B) limited fund class action settlement of consumer class action: Arthur v. Pestco Exterminating Co., No. CV-97-098 (Circuit Court of Jefferson County, Ala. 2004)
  • Settlement of claims of nearby residents claiming airborne particulate pollution resulting in property damages under Rule 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3) for U.S. Steel Mining Company, LLC
  • Settlement of claims of downstream landowners claiming property damages from water discharges under Rule 23(b)(2) for U.S. Steel Corporation
  • Settlement of claims of personal injury and property damages of individuals owning or residing on property near storm sewer for alleged release of ammonia under Rule 23(b)(2) for Wayne Farms LLC
  • Coupon and product settlement in state court of nationwide consumer class action by Miracle Aid hearing aid customers against Dahlberg, Inc
  • Coupon and product settlement in federal court of nationwide consumer class action by soft contact lens purchasers against Bausch & Lomb
  • Settlement in state court of nationwide consumer class action by purchasers of canned goods against Health Valley Foods
  • Coupon settlement of multi-state Rule 23(b)(3) class action against Verizon/GTE involving rental telephones
  • Settlement of statewide Rule 23(b)(1) consumer class action against a Birmingham-based pest control company
  • Settlement of nationwide Rule 23(b)(3) class action against Heilig-Myers Furniture Company
  • Settlement of statewide consumer class actions against a variety of financial companies through the re-structuring of mortgage loans in cases alleging violations of the Alabama Mini-Code and state law claims
  • Payment of $5,000 for settlement of statewide class action by indirect purchasers of architectural hinges
  • Lead counsel in the defense of credit insurance unearned premium class action pending in Muscogee County, Georgia; ultimately negotiated a nationwide class action settlement that involved an innovative nationwide publication program, as well as ground-breaking individual class member administration procedures
  • Lead counsel in the defense of competing nationwide “late fee” class action lawsuits against Movie Gallery in the states of Alabama, Tennessee, and Texas; ultimately, the Firm negotiated a nationwide class action settlement and successfully defended the nationwide class settlement in the competing jurisdictions
  • Assisted in the defense of another nationwide “late fee” class action settlement in St. Clair County, Illinois, involving Hollywood Entertainment Corporation
  • Settlement in federal court of nationwide Rule 23(b)(3) class action against a national rental car company on claims of inadequate disclosure of fees and taxes in its rental car business
  • Coupon settlement of nationwide Rule 23(b)(3) class action against World Omni Financial Corporation involving car leasing transactions
  • Settlement of 13-state class action for injunctive relief only in case seeking stigma property value diminution damages against Colonial Pipeline Co.

Enforcement of Class Action Judgments

Maynard has been successful in enforcing class action judgments against collateral attacks and suits by class members who failed to opt out of a Rule 23(b)(3) class action settlement. We have been successful in enforcing class action judgments both through the court that approved the class action settlement and the court in which the subsequent case was brought. Representative cases include:

  • Successfully defended, by court appointment, judgment of the district court declining to certify class action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: Landeros v. Pinnacle Recovery, Inc., 692 F. App’x 608 (11th Cir. 2017)
  • Successfully defended appeal by class member objector, represented by the Center for Class Action Fairness, to class action settlement): In re Southwest Airlines Voucher Litigation, 799 F. 3d 701 (7th Cir. 2015)
  • Removed Alabama state court case on eve of trial to out-of-state federal district court that had approved an earlier nationwide class action settlement: Marshall v. American General Life and Accident Ins. Co., 174 F. Supp. 2d 709 (M.D. Tenn. 2001)
  • Dismissal of claims in Alabama state court cases by plaintiffs who failed to opt out of Rule 23(b)(3) class actions settled outside of Alabama: See New York Life Insurance Company v. Robinson, 735 So. 2d 463 (Ala. 1999); New York Life Insurance Company v. Griffin, 794 So. 2d 1072 (Ala. 2001)
  • Obtained injunction from federal court in Alabama of Section 17200 claim filed in California by a class member who had opted out of Rule 23(b)(3) class action: Garst v. Franklin Life Insurance Company, Civil Action No. 97-N-0074-S (N.D. Ala. July 17, 2000)

Other Class Action Matters

Maynard has been involved with class action litigation in a wide variety of matters, including the following:

  • Defeating motion to remand in putative class action under “local controversy” and “local single event” exceptions to CAFA jurisdiction: Racca v. EFG General Partner Corp., et al., 2022 WL 2764735 (E.D. Tex. July 7, 2022)
  • Granting motion to stay discovery pending the court’s ruling on a motion to dismiss the consolidated class action complaint arising from a healthcare data breach implicating 1.3 million patient: In re: Mednax Services, Inc. Custom Data Security Breach Litigation, No. 21-md-02994 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 9, 2021)
  • Court of appeals held that the district court abused its discretion by failing to strike plaintiff’s nationwide class action allegations in putative class action against financial services company and its employees for their alleged securities fraud: Donelson v. Amerprise Fin. Serv., Inc., 999 F.3d 1080 (8th Cir. 2021)
  • Granting both motion to stay discovery and motion to transfer venue in putative class action alleging violations of Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act by online test proctoring corporation: Thakkar v. ProctorU, Inc., 2021 WL 2589019 (C.D. Ill. May 24, 2021); 2021 WL 5507041 (C.D. Ill. Nov. 23, 2021)
  • Granting motion to transfer venue in putative class action alleging a home manufacturer violated state and federal laws regarding alleged manufacturing defects: BMTP, LLC v. RBH, Inc., 2019 WL 407409 (M.D. La. Jan. 31, 2019)
  • Successful CAFA removal to federal court and defense of Plaintiff’s motion to remand based on the local controversy exception: Tenesha Adams, et al. v. Antonelli College, et al., Case No. 1:16-cv-00520 (S.D. Ohio)
  • Granting defendant’s motion to transfer venue of TCPA purported nationwide class action from plaintiff’s chosen forum to location of defendant’s headquarters: Camarena v. Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc., 2015 WL 4036258 (N.D. Ill. July 1, 2015)
  • Granting motion to transfer venue of purported nationwide class action and California sub-class from the Northern District of California to the defendant’s headquarters in the Western District of Texas, San Antonio Division: Saunders v. USAA Life Insurance Co., 71 F. Supp. 3d 1058 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2014)
  • Granting defendants’ motion to stay discovery pending the court’s ruling on motions to dismiss purported nationwide class action alleging RICO and common law claims: Weaver v. National Better Living Association, 2014 WL 1621951 (N.D. Ala. April 22, 2014)
  • Accepting defendants’ position that “center of gravity of [the 14 purported nationwide antitrust class actions] is in the Southeast” and transferring 11 purported class actions from N.D. Cal. to E.D. Tenn. where one case was pending: In re Cast Iron Soil Pipe and Fittings Antitrust Litigation, 999 F. Supp. 2d. 1368, 2014 WL 709763 (JPML Feb. 18, 2014)
  • Granting mandamus petition as to trial court’s severance order entered in violation of statutory stay provision pending resolution of interlocutory appeal of trial court’s order certifying nationwide class action [our law firm was first engaged after trial court’s orders were entered: In re Bliss & Glennon, Inc., 2014 WL 50831 (Tex. App. – Hous. (1 Dist.), Jan. 7, 2014)
  • Vacating district court’s CAFA remand order: Goodner v. Clayton Homes, Inc., 2013 WL 5194113 (8th Cir. Sept. 16, 2013)
  • Granting motion to stay discovery in purported class action pending a ruling on motion to dismiss: Patel v. New York Life Insurance Co., 2011 WL 6778545 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 20, 2011); Davis v. Home Buyers Warranty Corp., No. 2:10-cv-01815-SLB (N.D. Ala. Sept. 4, 2010)
  • Granting defendant’s motion to stay litigation in purported nationwide class action pending resolution of appeal on arbitration issue: Lawson v. Life of the South Insurance Co., 738 F. Supp. 2d 1376 (M.D. Ga. 2010)
  • Granting motion to transfer venue from Central District of California to Southern District of New York in purported nationwide class action involving catastrophic major medical insurance policies: Metz v. United States Life Insurance Company, 674 F. Supp. 2d 1141 (C.D. Cal. 2009)
  • Granting motion for more definite statement/RICO statement in purported class action asserting RICO and other claims relating to alleged employment of illegal aliens: Cruz v. Cinram, 574 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (N.D. Ala. 2008)
  • Granting motion to dismiss six defendants from purported class action in MDL proceeding based on plaintiffs’ lack of Article III standing against those defendants: In re FEMA Trailer Formaldehyde Products Liability Litigation, 570 F. Supp. 2d 851 (E.D. La 2008)
  • Granting summary judgment in putative class action that college misrepresented its approval status with state nursing board: Adams v. Antonelli College, 304 F.Supp.3d 656 (S.D. Ohio 2018)

Class Action Litigation News
Friday, April 15, 2022

MAYNARD DEEPENS BENCH WITH SEASONED LITIGATOR

Maynard welcomes seasoned trial lawyer Helen Kathryn Downs. Ms. Downs joins the Firm’s Birmingham, AL office as a Shareholder in the Litigation Section. Her practice focuses on the areas of products liability, including pharmaceutical and medical device defense, mass torts, banking litigation, and commercial litigation. She has advised Fortune 50...

Read More
Tuesday, March 1, 2022

William Courtney to Clerk at U.S. Supreme Court

Maynard & Gale (Maynard) is excited to announce that C. William "Will" Courtney has been selected for a clerkship with Justice Clarence Thomas of the United States Supreme Court. He will serve as one of Justice Thomas's four clerks for the 2023 Term. Will is a member of the Firm's...

Read More
Monday, November 22, 2021

MAYNARD RECEIVES NATIONAL DISTINCTION IN THE 2022 U.S. NEWS-BEST LAWYERS “BEST LAW FIRMS”

U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers®, collaboratively for the 12th consecutive year, announced the “Best Law Firms” rankings for 2022. Maynard is distinguished as a National Top Tier firm in numerous areas of law, including the Tier I rankings for our Patent Litigation and Intellectual Property Litigation practices...

Read More