On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Class Action Litigation 2014

Released on: Jul. 23, 2014
Running Time: 06:10:12

Running Time Segment Title Faculty Format
[01:06:59] Recent Developments in Class Action Litigation Georgene M. Vairo ~ Professor of Law and David P. Leonard Chair, Loyola Law School
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:56:39] Pitfalls of Class Action Notice and Claims Administration Lauren McGeever ~ Director, Class Action & Mass Tort Solutions, Epiq Systems, Inc.
Cameron Azari ~ Director, Legal Notice, Hilsoft Notifications/Epiq Systems
Karen Hanson Riebel ~ Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P.
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:20] Public Interest / Nonprofit Class Action Litigation Lisa E. Cleary ~ Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
Judith Goldiner ~ Attorney in Charge, Civil Law Reform Unit, The Legal Aid Society
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:01:49] Ethics in Class Action Litigation David G. Keyko ~ Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[00:57:52] Halliburton and Trends in Securities Class Actions Gregory A. Markel ~ Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Daniel L. Berger ~ Grant & Eisenhofer P.A.
On-Demand MP3 MP4
[01:00:23] Litigation Strategies Joel S. Feldman ~ Sidley Austin LLP
Keith M. Fleischman ~ The Fleischman Law Firm PLLC
Jeremy A. Lieberman ~ Pomerantz LLP
Jeremy M. Creelan ~ Jenner & Block LLP
On-Demand MP3 MP4

Class action lawsuits remain an integral part of high stakes litigation and the courts, including the Supreme Court, have taken notice. This year’s program will give you the tools and strategies you need to effectively handle these complex cases. Our outstanding faculty of plaintiffs’ and defense counsel and academics will bring you up-to-date on important developments in class action litigation. You and your clients will benefit from this program whether your practice focuses on employment law, products liability, toxic tort, securities, consumer fraud, or civil rights. The course also includes pragmatic tips on litigation strategies designed to improve your skills and your chances for success in the courtroom.

Lecture Topics 
[Total time 06:10:12]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.

  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:06:10]
    Jayne A. Goldstein, Howard S. Suskin
  • Recent Developments in Class Action Litigation [01:06:59]
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • Pitfalls of Class Action Notice and Claims Administration [00:56:39]
    Cameron Azari, Lauren McGeever, Karen Hanson Riebel
  • Public Interest / Nonprofit Class Action Litigation [01:00:20]
    Judith Goldiner, Lisa E. Cleary
  • Ethics in Class Action Litigation [01:01:49]
    David G. Keyko
  • Halliburton and Trends in Securities Class Actions [00:57:52]
    Daniel L. Berger, Gregory A. Markel
  • Litigation Strategies [01:00:23]
    Jeremy M. Creelan, Joel S. Feldman, Keith M. Fleischman, Jeremy A. Lieberman

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:

  • Mississippi ex rel. Hood v. AU Optronics: The Next Big CAFA Case or Another Punt?
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • Moore’s Federal Practice ® The Complete CAFA: Analysis and Developments Under Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • What Goes Around, Comes Around: From the Rector of Barkway to Knowles
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • Gabriel Joseph Carrera v. Bayer Corporation; Bayer Healthcare, LLC, (Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2013)
  • In re: Checking Account Overdraft Litigation (U.S. Dist. Ct., Southern District of Miami 2013) Declaration of Cameron R. Azari, Esq., on Implementation and Adequacy of Settlement Notice Program (Attachments 1–5)
  • In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation Settlement Notice Plan
  • Class Actions in the Pro Bono Context
    Judith Goldiner, Lisa E. Cleary
  • Class Action Ethics Issues
    David G. Keyko
  • Recent Noteworthy Class Action Decisions
    Howard S. Suskin
  • Settling Class Actions
    Gregory A. Markel
  • Comcast’s Lasting Impact: Crystallization and Affirmation of the Rule 23(B)(3) Predominance Requirement
    Joel S. Feldman

Presentation Material

  • PLI Class Action Litigation: Recent Developments
    Georgene M. Vairo
  • Pitfalls of Class Action Notice and Claims Administration
    Cameron Azari, Lauren McGeever, Karen Hanson Riebel
  • Class Actions in the Pro Bono Context
    Judith Goldiner, Lisa E. Cleary
  • CLASS ACTION ETHICS ISSUES – Avoiding Red and Yellow Cards
    David G. Keyko
  • Halliburton and Trends in Securities Class Actions
Co-Chair(s)
Jayne A. Goldstein ~ Pomerantz LLP
Howard S. Suskin ~ Jenner & Block LLP
Speaker(s)
Cameron Azari ~ Director, Legal Notice, Hilsoft Notifications/Epiq Systems
Daniel L. Berger ~ Grant & Eisenhofer P.A.
Lisa E. Cleary ~ Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
Jeremy M. Creelan ~ Jenner & Block LLP
Joel S. Feldman ~ Sidley Austin LLP
Keith M. Fleischman ~ The Fleischman Law Firm PLLC
Judith Goldiner ~ Attorney in Charge, Civil Law Reform Unit, The Legal Aid Society
David G. Keyko ~ Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP
Jeremy A. Lieberman ~ Pomerantz LLP
Gregory A. Markel ~ Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Lauren McGeever ~ Director, Class Action & Mass Tort Solutions, Epiq Systems, Inc.
Karen Hanson Riebel ~ Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P.
Georgene M. Vairo ~ Professor of Law and David P. Leonard Chair, Loyola Law School

PLI makes every effort to accredit its On-Demand Web Programs and Segments.  Please check the Credit Information box to the right of each product description for credit information specific to your state.


On-Demand Web Programs and Segments
 are approved in:

Alabama1, Alaska, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho*, Illinois , Iowa2*, Kansas, Kentucky*, Louisiana, Maine*, Mississippi, Missouri3, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire4, New Jersey, New Mexico5, New York6,  North Carolina7, North Dakota, Ohio8, Oklahoma9, Oregon*, Pennsylvania10, Rhode Island11, South Carolina, Tennessee12, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia13, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin14 and Wyoming*.

Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin DO NOT approve Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs.


Please Note: The State Bar of Arizona does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education requirement. PLI programs may qualify for credit based on the requirements outlined in the MCLE Regulations and Ariz. R. Sup. Ct. Rule 45.

*PLI will apply for credit upon request. Louisiana and New Hampshire: PLI will apply for credit upon request for audio-only on-demand web programs.


1Alabama: Approval of all web based programs is limited to a maximum of 6.0 credits.

 

2Iowa:  The approval is for one year from recorded date. Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.

3Missouri:  On-demand web programs are restricted to six hours of self-study credit per year.  Self-study may not be used to satisfy the ethics requirements.  Self-study can not be used for carryover credit.

 

4New Hamphsire:  The approval is for three years from recorded date.

5New Mexico:  On-Demand web programs are restricted to 4.0 self-study credits per year. 


6New York:  Newly admitted attorneys may not take non-traditional course formats such as on-demand Web Programs or live Webcasts for CLE credit. Newly admitted attorneys not practicing law in the United States, however, may earn 12 transitional credits in non-traditional formats. 

7North Carolina:  A maximum of 4 credits per reporting period may be earned by participating in on-demand web programs. 


8Ohio:  To confirm that the web program has been approved, please refer to the list of Ohio’s Approved Self Study Activities at http://www.sconet.state.oh.us.  Online programs are considered self-study.  Ohio attorneys have a 6 credit self-study limit per compliance period.  The Ohio CLE Board states that attorneys must have a 100% success rate in clicking on timestamps to receive ANY CLE credit for an online program.

9Oklahoma:  Up to 6 credits may be earned each year through computer-based or technology-based legal education programs.


10Pennsylvania:  PA attorneys may only receive a maximum of four (4) hours of distance learning credit per compliance period. All distance learning programs must be a minimum of 1 full hour.
 

11Rhode Island:  Audio Only On-Demand Web Programs are not approved for credit.  On-Demand Web Programs must have an audio and video component.

12Tennessee:  The approval is for the calendar year in which the live program was presented.

13Virginia: All distance learning courses are to be done in an educational setting, free from distractions.

14Wisconsin: Ethics credit is not allowed.  The ethics portion of the program will be approved for general credit.  There is a 10 credit limit for on-demand web programs during every 2-year reporting period.  Does not approve of Audio-only On-Demand Webcasts.


Running time and CLE credit hours are not necessarily the same. Please be aware that many states do not permit credit for luncheon and keynote speakers.


If you have already received credit for attending some or the entire program, please be aware that state administrators do not permit you to accrue additional credit for repeat viewing even if an additional credit certificate is subsequently issued.


Note that some states limit the number of credit hours attorneys may claim for online CLE activities, and state rules vary with regard to whether online CLE activities qualify for participatory or self-study credits. For more information, call Customer Service (800) 260-4PLI (4754) or e-mail info@pli.edu.

 
Print Share Email