BackClass Action Defense

Nelson Mullins lawyers are experienced in class action and litigation in the Southeast and beyond. In the fields of consumer financial services, insurance, environmental law, healthcare, labor and employment, product liability, unfair and deceptive trade practices, utilities and securities, Nelson Mullins lawyers have defended class actions in state courts, federal district courts, bankruptcy courts, and circuit courts of the United States Court of Appeals locally, regionally, and nationwide. In addition to traditional class actions, we are experienced in defending claims raised in “opt-out” litigation.
 
We are able to team experienced class action litigators with practitioners from various fields to meet the needs of the client and the case. From the beginning of the case, where proper understandings of jurisdictional issues and the viability of plaintiffs’ claims are critical, through the class certification stage, where appropriately framing the issues may affect the outcome, to the end of the case, where good counsel about the risks of litigation and effective advocacy on the merits establish the basis for success, Nelson Mullins attorneys bring to bear our knowledge and experience, our work ethic, and our dedication to excellent client service.
 
Having served as national, regional, and local counsel to defendants in multi-district litigation (MDL), we offer experience of not only the procedures but also the various strategies employed by our clients’ adversaries in industry-wide litigation. We have appeared before the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation and have served as lead counsel for our clients in MDL proceedings. Nelson Mullins attorneys are currently serving as national coordinating counsel in industry-wide litigation in the fields of pharmaceutical and electrical products.
 
We also offer the latest in technology and case-management solutions in MDL and class action litigation. We regularly assist clients faced with the challenges of discovery management and “e-discovery” in litigation and class actions. Our class action defense practice includes working with clients to create solutions to difficult issues related to databases containing information about putative class members.
 
A sampling of our cases: 
  • As national counsel for a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products in MDL proceedings, we were part of the defense team that defeated nationwide and regional class certification of “economic damages” claims arising under warranty and consumer laws.
  • In another “economic damages” putative class action consolidated in MDL proceedings, we are defending one of three manufacturers in litigation that challenges a product widely used by consumers across the country.
  • We are serving as liaison counsel in MDL litigation, representing an insurer charged with racial discrimination in the setting of life insurance premiums.
  • In a “bilateral” class action, certified by the trial court as to plaintiff and defendant classes, we represented a group of defendants in what turned out to be the leading case on class certification from the South Carolina Supreme Court, as we argued for reversal of the trial court’s rulings on class certification.
  • Representing a mobile home manufacturer in putative class actions based on allegations of defective soil anchor tie-down systems, we argued for summary judgment before the courts reached the issue of class certification.
  • In another case for the same manufacturer in Maryland Circuit Court, we argued for precertification summary judgment on plaintiffs’ claims based on an allegedly improper method for installing footers for manufactured housing above the frost line.
  • In the seminal case in South Carolina on the application of the state’s “door closing” statute to class actions, we argued, and the state supreme court held, that the statute precludes certification of a nationwide class in state court.
  • We represented the prevailing party in a leading case from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals on the “cutting edge” jurisdictional issue of whether the “supplemental jurisdiction” statute, 28 U.S.C § 1367, overruled the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Zahn v. International Paper.
  • In federal district courts, we represented mortgage lenders who were charged with violating the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Action and prevailed in arguments against class certification.
  • Representing mortgage lenders in a number of cases arising under the South Carolina Consumer Protection Code, we argued against class certification in a number of cases, prevailed on precertification summary judgment motions in others, and negotiated favorable class settlements in others.
  • In a number of cases in federal district courts, we have argued against class certification in cases arising under RICO.
  • We are currently defending several cases in which plaintiffs assert wrongdoing related to credit insurance sold in consumer loan transactions.

  • We represent a manufactured housing company in this litigation. Originally filed as a class action, after discovery and briefing, the Court denied class certification, and the case continues as a multi-district litigation involving tens of thousands of claimants. Nelson Mullins is actively defending this action for its client.