Pilgrim v. Universal Health Card, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that, in Ohio, “the place of the injury controls in a consumer-protection lawsuit, requiring application of the home-state law”
• holding that, evaluating potential class members’ claims under Ohio’s choice-of-law rules, the “laws of the potential class members’ home States will govern their claims”
• concluding that because the “laws of the State where each injury took place would govern these claims ... no common legal issues favor a class-action approach”
• noting that “parties may not establish subject matter jurisdiction in the federal courts by consenting to it” (citing Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 93)
• explaining that Fed. R. Civ. 23(c)(1)(A) states that the district court should decide whether to certify a class “[a]t an early practicable time”
• noting that “parties may not establish subject matter jurisdiction in the federal courts by consenting to it” (citing Steel Co., 523 U.S. at 93, 118 S.Ct. 1003)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).