Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 29 DECEMBER 2025

Class Action Decisions Published November 2025

Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP
Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP
Contributor
Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

The Firm Shook, Hardy & Bacon’s London group offers an elite, globally recognised product liability...

View firm profile
Explore more from Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP

Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction. The Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff's decision to remove class allegations after a case...

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Mitchell F. Engel
Mitchell F. Engel

Highlights from this issue include: 

  • Class Action Fairness Act Jurisdiction. The Ninth Circuit held that a plaintiff's decision to remove class allegations after a case is removed from state court to federal court deprives the federal court of jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act.
  • Ascertainability. The Tenth Circuit held that for a class to be ascertainable, the class definition must (1) be defined clearly and cannot be defined too vaguely and (2) be defined objectively and cannot be based on subjective criteria. The Tenth Circuit refused to impose a separate “administrative feasibility” requirement.
  • American Pipe Tolling. The Fifth Circuit held the Texas Supreme Court would likely not toll the statute of limitations for a state law claim during a pending federal class action.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See more popular content from