Higa v. Cnty. of Hawai'i

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming district court’s striking of multi-state class action claims where plaintiff failed to brief differences in laws, but regardless, differences in laws “swamp[ed] any common issues and “defeat[ed] predominance”
• affirming the strike of class allegations where “different state laws govern[ed] different Plaintiffs’ claims”
• “The fact that Sections 349 and 350 are not traditional fraud statutes does not necessarily mean that Rule 9(b) does not apply.”
• “District courts are permitted to [strike class allegations] on the pleadings and before discovery is complete when it is apparent from the complaint that a class action cannot be maintained.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).