Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Phipps
- Brief in Opposition (01/08/2016)
In this case, plaintiffs who were members of the class decertified on the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes (2011) and whose individual claims were tolled during the pendency of that case under American Pipe & Construction Co. v. Utah (1974) brought a subsequent action advancing those claims on behalf of themselves and a much smaller class, defined to meet the criteria of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 as construed by this Court in Dukes. Wal-Mart did not contest that those timely claims could be pursued in a multiplicity of individual actions, but argued that the claims could not be pursued in a subsequent class action. Rejecting Wal-Mart’s argument, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ruled that the plaintiffs could attempt to pursue their claims, with the benefit of tolling, on behalf of the very different class proposed in this case. Wal-Mart petitioned the Supreme Court to review the appellate court's decision. We served as co-counsel on the opposition to Wal-Mart's Petition, and the Court denied the petition.