National Consumers League v. General Mills, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s claim that the cost of injunctive relief would exceed $75,000 was “too speculative”
• holding that although the defendant’s argument for removability is “contrary to other decisions in this district . . . there is no D.C. Circuit law foreclosing its arguments,” so attorney’s fees and costs should not be awarded
• explaining that “aggregation of damages, aggregation of attorneys’ fees is not appropriate in a CPPA case”
• finding that defendant was not able to remove the case under CAFA because “at least for CPPA claims brought on behalf of the general public as here, plaintiffs need not comply with Rule 23”
• rejecting the defendant’s assertions that attorneys’ fees would probably exceed the jurisdictional threshold based on a “conservative estimate of $250 per hour of attorney time”
• declining to grant attorney fees to the plaintiff where removal “was not contrary to well-settled law or binding authority”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).