Seyfarth Synopsis: In a recent
decision, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals rebuked a Pennsylvania
district court's skeletal analysis of plaintiffs' class
action claims. Particularly, the court took issue with the district
court's failure to define the classes with sufficient
specificity and failure to undertake a rigorous analysis of Rule
23's predominance and commonality requirements.
In a recent decision, the Third Circuit strongly affirmed the
rigorous analysis that courts must apply when determining whether
wage-hour claims should be certified.
In
Reinig v. RBS Citizens, N.A., the Third Circuit Court
of Appeals reviewed a Pennsylvania district court's order
certifying classes of Mortgage Loan Officers ("MLOs") in
a wage-hour lawsuit against their employer, Citizens Bank. The MLOs
argued that, although Citizens maintained a policy which allowed
employees to work overtime with pre-approval, Citizens perpetuated
a firm-wide "policy to violate the policy" by
