The application of the Supreme Court's decision in
Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court of California,
137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), to class actions has led to much confusion
and an ever-widening circuit split. In Bristol-Myers, a
mass action, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a California state
court could not exercise jurisdiction over a non-California
defendant with respect to claims of plaintiffs who did not reside
in California and conduct that did not occur in California. The
extent to which this holding applies to class and collective
actions has divided federal district courts and courts of
appeals.
In Cruson v. Jackson National Life Insurance Company, a
Rule 23 class action, the Fifth Circuit left open the possibility
that Bristol-Myers applies to prevent federal courts in
Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi from exercising jurisdiction over
a non-resident defendant with respect to non-resident class
members. The court weighed in on when a defendant waives
