The Eleventh Circuit today granted the defendant employer’s petition for rehearing en banc in Gogel v. Kia Motors Manufacturing of Georgia, Inc., 904 F.3d 1226 (11th Cir. 2018). The now-vacated panel opinion, authored by Judge Martin, had affirmed summary judgment for the defendant on the plaintiff’s discrimination claims but revived her claim for retaliation. Judge…
Tag: Judge Beverly Martin
Disclosure of Additional Digits on a Credit Card Receipt Sufficient to Confer Article III Standing to Bring a FACTA Claim (Opinion Vacated, and Petition for Rehearing En Banc Granted, October 4, 2019)
On October 5, 2018, a panel of the Eleventh Circuit held that a plaintiff has standing to pursue a claim under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”) if a merchant discloses too many digits of a credit card number on a receipt, even without subsequent misuse of the plaintiff’s identity or credit card. …
Court Revives two Employment Discrimination Suits
The court this week published two employment discrimination opinions. In one, the court affirmed summary judgment for the Korean-owned defendant on the plaintiff’s claims that she had been discriminated against because she was a woman and an American, but revived her claim that she had been fired in retaliation for complaining. Gogel v. Kia Motors…
Spirited Court Widens Circuit Split Over Who Decides Class Arbitrability
In Spirit Airlines, Inc. v. Maizes, 2018 WL 3866335 (11th Cir. Aug. 15, 2018), the Eleventh Circuit concluded that an arbitration agreement providing that the rules of the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) will cover all disputes constitutes clear and unmistakable evidence that the parties intended for an arbitrator to decide whether class arbitration is available….
A Default in Proceeding with Arbitration Does Not Necessarily Authorize a Default Judgment in Federal Court
In Hernandez v. Acosta Tractors Inc., 2018 WL 3761126 (11th Cir. Aug. 8, 2018), the Eleventh Circuit held that a party’s default in proceeding with arbitration after requesting it did not necessarily warrant entry of default judgment against that party in federal court. Julio Hernandez sued his former employer, Acosta Tractors, and two of its…
Eleventh Circuit Declines to Revisit Dreadlocks Discrimination Case En Banc
Nearly a full year after issuing a revised opinion supporting an initial holding that hairstyles and other “cultural characteristics”—like dreadlocks—cannot form the basis for a Title VII claim of intentional racial discrimination, the Eleventh Circuit denied the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s petition for rehearing en banc in EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions (CMS), 2017 WL…
Eleventh Circuit Digs Deep to Revive SCAD Trademark Suit
In an October 3, 2017, opinion, a panel of the Eleventh Circuit reversed the Northern District of Georgia’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant in a trademark-infringement suit brought by Savannah College of Art and Design (SCAD). In Savannah College of Art and Design, Inc. v. Sportswear, Inc., 2017 WL 4369451, the court held…
The Federal Medical Device Amendments Do Not Preempt All State-Law Claims
The Eleventh Circuit applied Florida law and the preemption provisions of the federal Medical Device Amendments of 1976, 21 U.S.C. § 360c et seq., to reverse the district court’s dismissal of some, but not all, of a plaintiff’s claims against the manufacturer of a hip-replacement device. Mink v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 2017 WL 2723913…
Employees May Join FLSA Collective Action With Rule 23 Class Action in Same Proceeding
The Eleventh Circuit has joined the D.C., Second, Third, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits in holding that employees may bring a collective action against their employer under § 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (“FLSA”) in the same proceeding in which they seek Rule 23(b) certification of state-law claims. Calderone v. Scott, 2016…
Statutory Non-Waiver Provision Does Not Prevent Severance of Unlawful Terms and Arbitration Enforcement
Where an arbitration provision includes substantive limitations on the relief otherwise available to a party under a federal statute, there are three possible judicial responses: sever the offending provisions and enforce the agreement; enforce the agreement and leave any invalidity questions to the arbitrator, as in PacifiCare Health Systems, Inc. v. Book, 538 U.S. 401…