Class Action

JORDEN BURT's Class Action Practice Team consists of more than 60 experienced professionals with skills tailored to the unique challenges facing the Firm's clients. Our lawyers handle complex litigation at all levels of the state and federal courts, including in the Supreme Court of the United States. JORDEN BURT's class action lawyers have successfully defended hundreds of class actions, regularly involving hundreds of millions of dollars, on behalf of the largest financial services and healthcare institutions. We have defended high exposure cases in numerous jurisdictions across the country and are frequently retained to manage or coordinate the overall institutional response to multidistrict litigation.

Since the explosion of class action litigation in the 1990s, JORDEN BURT has played a leading role in defending against the trial bar's concerted efforts to focus punitive tort litigation against national financial institutions. JORDEN BURT's extensive experience in this high exposure litigation means that our lawyers have abundant familiarity with virtually every procedural legal issue, including standing, removal, arbitration, MDL proceedings, challenges to venue, joinder of parties, jurisdiction (including the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 issues), and, of course, class certification. The Firm also has an extraordinary understanding of the legal doctrines and areas of law of particular import to the financial services industries, including highly-successful approaches based upon the filed-rate and form doctrines, primary jurisdiction, the McCarran-Ferguson Act, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ("PSLRA") and the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act ("SLUSA").

These turbulent economic times have only spurred the plaintiffs' bar to file increasingly aggressive class action lawsuits. JORDEN BURT is currently lead counsel in class actions in many of these evolving lawsuits. JORDEN BURT directs the defense of the litigation, drafts all significant pleadings and motions, argues all significant hearings and tries cases as first or second chair depending upon the dynamics of the local venue. Over time, the Firm has developed an unparalleled network of top local trial lawyers throughout the country to assist as called upon in local hearings, discovery, and trial work.

Multistate trial bar networking presents one of the most serious threats in high exposure venues throughout the country. Even class actions with mid-range exposures are now brought by groups of 10 or more plaintiffs' firms, raising substantial risk of overwhelming discovery abuses, particularly in the area of electronic discovery. Significant litigation can no longer be managed through use of the traditional law department - local counsel arrangements, particularly in many notable venues. More sophisticated, structured, and proactive approaches must be employed to respond in those states presenting unusual substantive fraud laws, punitive damage laws, and plaintiff-oriented local procedural rules. Successful management of this type of litigation requires not only highly-skilled lawyers, but an intimate knowledge of the risks inherent in various jurisdictions, the connections between counsel and judges, and a special expertise in selecting and teaming with local trial counsel as appropriate.

Our Services

The Firm's Class Action Practice Team has an unsurpassed record of success reflecting a truly unique, national expertise in defending claims which relate to the sale, marketing, and administration of financial and insurance products and services, including:

• Sales practices class actions
• Securities fraud class actions
• Consumer class actions
• Property damage claims resulting from natural disasters
• Managed care class actions
• RICO class actions
• Discrimination and other employment class actions
• ERISA and other class claims involving fiduciary duties
• Counseling on market conduct issues where class claims often arise
• Conducting exposure analyses for clients concerned with class or mass action litigation risk
• Evaluating settlement costs and structuring innovative class action resolutions

Relevant Experience

Interest/Dividend Crediting; Expense Allocation:

• In re: Life USA Holding, Inc., 242 F.3d 136 (3d Cir.) (decertification of nationwide class of insureds asserting claims of fraud in connection with the sale and administration of bonus annuities).
• Baymiller v. Guarantee Mut. Life Ins. Co., 2000 WL 1026565 (C.D. Cal.); 2000 WL 33774562 (C.D. Cal.) (dismissal of nationwide class action alleging improper interest crediting and cost of insurance expenses under life insurance contracts).
• Bowers v. Jefferson Pilot Financial Ins. Co., 219 F.R.D. 578 (E.D. Mich.) (decertification of national class action challenging interpretation of policy provisions relating to insurance premiums).
• Zarrella v. Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co., 824 A.2d 1249 (R.I.) (affirming denial of certification of class of insureds asserting dividend crediting claims under life insurance policies).
• Mentis v. Delaware American (AIG) Life, 2000 WL 973299 (Del. Super.) (nationwide class certification denied to class of insureds asserting claims of wrongdoing in connection with the crediting of interest and charging of expenses under universal life policies).
• Toraya (Davis) v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co., 2008 WL 4482991 (D. Ariz.), affirmed by the Ninth Circuit, No. 03-17274 (9th Cir.) (variable life insurance class action filed in state court successfully removed and dismissed under SLUSA).
• Smith v. John Hancock Ins. Co., No. 06-3876, slip op. 2008 WL 4145709 (E.D. Pa.) (class certification denied in case involving deferred, bonus annuities).

Cost of Insurance (COI):

• Jones v. GE Life & Annuity Assurance Co., 2004 WL 691749 (M.D.N.C.) (judgment on the pleadings granted in nationwide class action alleging improper increase in cost of insurance charge for life insurance policies).

Long Term Care:

• Alvarez v. Insurance Co. of N.A., No. 07-1102 (3d Cir.) (affirming district court's dismissal of long term care class action).
• Bradberry v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co., 222 F.R.D. 568 (W.D. Tenn.) (decertification of a class of long term care insurance policy owners).

Long Term Disability:

• Doe v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co., No. 05-2512 (E.D. Pa.) (summary judgment granted insurer in ERISA class action challenging 24-month mental illness limitation on benefits).

Sales Practices - Vanishing Premium/Replacement:

• Parkhill v. Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co., 286 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir.) (affirming denial of class certification in MDL litigation alleging numerous claims in connection with sale of alleged vanishing premium policies).
• Humphrey v. Allstate Life Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 99 CH 8383 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook County) (class certification denied to class alleging fraudulent sales practices).
• McCord v. Minnesota Mut. Life Ins. Co., 346 F.3d 830 (8th Cir.) (affirming summary judgment on all claims in MDL "vanishing premium" market conduct case).
• Adams v. Southern Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 493 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir.) (claims as to replacement life insurance policies barred by earlier class action settlement and release).

Racial Discrimination:

• Thorn v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co., 445 F.3d 311 (4th Cir.) (affirming district court's denial of motion for certification of class of owners of 1.4 million industrial life policies).

Credit Cards:

• Hernandez v. GE Capital Consumer Card Co., Case Nos. 00-4828-CIV and 01-23566 (S.D. Fla. and Fla. Cir. Ct.) (defense and settlement of national payment posting class action with 155 million class members against credit card banks).
• Bettan v. American Bankers Ins. Group, Inc., Case No. CV00-1924 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2000) (obtained dismissal of complaint alleging national RICO class action and deceptive marketing in connection with sale of credit card insurance).

Claims Handling/Payment Practices:

• Hammett v. American Bankers Ins. Co. of Florida, 203 F.R.D. 690 (S.D. Fla.) (class certification denied in action by insureds asserting improper claim handling practices).

Modal Premium:

• Tropp v. Western-Southern Life Ins. Co., 381 F.3d 591 (7th Cir.) (successful defense of putative class action lawsuit alleging that the modal premium overcharges experienced by the plaintiff were typical of the modal overcharges suffered by the entire class and constituted a violation of an Illinois statutory fraud act).
• Berardinelli v. General American Life Ins. Co. (In re General American Life Ins. Co. Sales Practices Litigation), 357 F.3d 800 (8th Cir.) (successful enforcement of nationwide class action settlement by upholding a district court's order enjoining the plaintiff's state modal premium putative class action as barred and released by that settlement).
• Hurlocker v. MetLife Investors USA Ins. Co., Case No: D-0101-CV-2002-2723 (N.M. 1st Dist.) (defense of putative class action alleging modal premium claims successfully resolved on an individual basis).

Premium Rating:

• Voyager Ins. Cos. v. Whitson, 867 So.2d 1065 (Ala.) (decertification of class advancing statutory and common law claims relating to premium rating).

Property Losses from Natural Disasters:

• Jimenez v. Citizens Property Ins. Corp., No. 07-03449 (Fla. Cir. Ct.) (dismissal of a statewide class action concerning hurricane-caused damages).
• Schlegel v. Citizens Property Ins. Corp., No. 07-05457 (Fla. Cir. Ct.) (dismissal of a statewide class action concerning hurricane-related claims).

Miscellaneous:

• London v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 340 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir.) (decertification of class advancing claims relating to insurance code violations allegedly voiding thousands of policies for illegality).
• In re Dynegy, Inc. ERISA Litig., 309 F. Supp. 2d 861 (S.D. Tex.) (obtained dismissal of directed trustee in "employer stock drop" class action).
• Buell v. Direct General Ins. Agency, Inc., 2008 WL 598281 (11th Cir.) (dismissal with prejudice of statewide class action for alleged violation of insurance statute under which plaintiffs demanded the voiding of hundreds of thousands of policies).
• Frelin v. Oakwood Homes Corp., No. Civ-2001-53-3, 2002 WL 31863487 (Ark. Cir. Ct.) (class certification denied in action by insureds asserting point of sale licensing and fraud claims).
• American Bankers Ins. Co. of Florida v. Booth, 830 So.2d 1205 (Miss.) (decision barring all class actions as a matter of law in Mississippi state courts).
• Freeman v. Pacific Life Ins. Co., 577 S.E. 2d 184 (N.C.) (affirming judgment against class member challenging claim preclusion of class settlement).
• Cheatwood v. Barry University, 2001 WL 1769914 (Fla. Cir. Ct.) (class certification denied in action by law students against university on accreditation issues).