Class Action & Multidistrict Litigation

When you face potential class action litigation or the prospect of sprawling multidistrict litigation, you need a team with a track record of winning early dismissal through dispositive motions, defeating class certification, and protecting your company’s brand and reputation. We’ve handled some of the largest and most complex class action cases in the U.S., including dozens of major MDL matters.

When it comes to high-stakes litigation, few types of cases pose a greater threat to a company than class action lawsuits or the prospect of multidistrict litigation. Alston & Bird’s Class Action & Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) Team has taken on some of the most complex class action cases and MDLs in the country and faced off against some of the nation’s most prominent law firms. We have a winning record to show for it.

Our lawyers fight aggressively for our clients, frequently winning dismissal of claims early in a case, defeating class certification, and even winning in the U.S. Supreme Court. Our diverse, multidisciplinary team defends clients in class actions in an array of industries and practice areas. From the defense of antitrust price-fixing and automotive product defect class actions to massive data breach and privacy class actions, we have litigated some of the highest-profile cases in recent memory, including headline-grabbing MDLs.

Our class action litigation and MDL team provides a full spectrum of guidance and perspective that goes beyond your company’s needs in the courtroom. We understand that litigation is not your business. We listen to you to ensure that our litigation strategy is consistent with and furthers your business objectives—whether that means structuring a global resolution or taking a case through trial and appeal. Our seasoned litigators understand that MDLs are often accompanied by parallel proceedings, including investigations and prosecutions by both state and federal agencies and industry regulators, and we are well-versed in coordinating strategies across multiple proceedings. Protecting your brand and reputation is an integral part of our proactive litigation strategies. With excellent working relationships with crisis management and public relations firms, we help ensure that your communications strategy syncs with your legal strategy and your broader business objectives.

Class action lawsuits pose enormous risk to a company’s reputation and bottom line—risks that are magnified in MDLs. Alston & Bird’s class action and MDL team has earned the trust of major corporations by recognizing the full scope of potential exposure, listening attentively to our clients’ objectives, executing proactive and innovative defense strategies, and protecting the integrity of our clients’ brands with a rapid and comprehensive response.

MDL Matters

Currently serve as lead counsel for Porsche Cars North America and Porsche AG in the In re Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” MDL pending in the Northern District of California. Porsche initially faced hundreds of millions of dollars of exposure from nearly 150 lawsuits, most of which were brought as consumer class actions, at the federal, state, and even small claims court levels. In addition to these consumer cases, Porsche also faced a reseller class action, competitive dealer class action, and sales person class action, and was named in suits initiated by the FTC, DOJ, and state attorneys general. We worked diligently to consolidate the vast majority of those suits in the federal “Clean Diesel” MDL, often employing creative arguments to successfully remove cases filed in state court. Following formation of the MDL, we were able to negotiate various stipulated orders that minimized Porsche’s discovery burdens while the parties worked toward settlement. Ultimately, we were able to reach agreements in the MDL to resolve the consumer class actions, the reseller class action, and the DOJ, FTC, and California AG actions. These settlements were unprecedented in terms of both scope and speed, resolving in just 18 months over a half million consumer claims by providing meaningful and practical relief to consumers, while minimizing Porsche’s liability and exposure. Additionally, the plaintiffs in the competitive dealer class action elected to voluntarily dismiss Porsche following limited discovery in that matter. Alston & Bird also successfully represented Porsche in numerous non-removable lawsuits in state courts, including consolidated or coordinated statewide proceedings in California, Virginia, and Texas. Alston & Bird continues to represent Porsche in numerous “opt-out” cases, the vast majority of which are now pending in the federal MDL, and in a sales person class action pending in the MDL.

Serving as lead trial counsel on behalf of the U.S.’s largest automobile insurer in 30 consolidated antitrust and RICO cases in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceeding in the Middle District of Florida. The plaintiffs asserted that our client led a conspiracy to fix prices and drive down competition in the automobile repair industry. Not one of the plaintiffs’ core claims has survived motion to dismiss; we have obtained nearly 50 motions to dismiss and are now defending the integrity of those orders in the Eleventh Circuit. We also obtained dismissal of the Louisiana state attorney general’s claim against our client based on the same set of facts.
Currently serve as lead counsel for Mazda Motor Corporation and Mazda Motor of America, Inc. in the In re Takata Airbag MDL in the Southern District of Florida. The Takata MDL arose from the largest recall in automotive history, with virtually the entire U.S. automotive market impacted by the recall of Takata airbag inflators. Mazda faced economic-loss class actions involving a wide variety of claims under the laws of almost every U.S. state. This litigation was complicated by parallel investigation proceedings, including a criminal investigation of Takata and multiple congressional hearings. We also serve as co-lead counsel for Mazda in a lawsuit brought in New Mexico state court by the New Mexico attorney general relating to Takata airbags. In the MDL, Alston & Bird secured several significant victories for Mazda, including a major win on a choice-of-law dispute that effectively eliminated certification of a nationwide class against Mazda. Alston & Bird also successfully moved to dismiss a number of plaintiffs’ breach of warranty and fraud claims, which greatly reduced Mazda’s potential exposure. In 2017, after years of litigation, Alston & Bird helped negotiate and secure a favorable settlement for Mazda and its customers, which included funding for an outreach program designed to increase recall completion rates. Alston & Bird continues to work closely with Mazda’s recall operations and assist Mazda with the implementation of the outreach plan.
Hired as replacement counsel by Taishan Gypsum Company on the eve of a federal judge awarding class plaintiffs a $1.2 billion default judgment in an MDL. Within three months of appearing, Alston & Bird’s team dismantled the plaintiffs’ class structure, expert witness testimony, and class damages methodology through briefing and discovery and has reduced the plaintiffs’ requested damages amount to nearly a quarter of their original request. Alston & Bird forced the plaintiffs to produce another round of detailed discovery for each class member and continues to aggressively challenge the plaintiffs’ damages proofs.
Represented a multinational home improvement retailer in connection with a sophisticated cyberattack and criminal intrusion involving customized malware targeting payment card data from point-of-sale systems. The representation included coordination with the payment card brand networks and federal and state law enforcement agencies, directing the forensic investigation of the PFI and other third-party forensic firms, and the defense of multiple putative class actions filed by financial institutions. Through careful discovery and using a third-party settlement process, Alston & Bird was able to pare down the putative class and reach a settlement of roughly $25 million, far below the plaintiffs’ initial billion-dollar demand.
Served as lead counsel in the economic loss class actions in the Toyota Unintended Acceleration (UA) Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability MDL in the Central District of California and coordinating counsel for Toyota across all UA matters. The UA MDL was the largest mass tort litigation in the country and consisted of more than 200 class actions and individual economic loss cases and more than 100 individual product liability cases. We defeated several of the plaintiffs’ claims and limited liability by (1) defeating the effort to apply California law to out of state purchasers, thereby foreclosing certification of a nationwide class; (2) obtaining an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit of the Court’s Article III standing order; (3) winning the dismissal of foreign plaintiffs’ claims; and (4) winning the dismissal of Florida and New York consumers’ claims, two of the three states set for early disposition.
Represented Louisiana Pacific in multibillion-dollar direct and indirect antitrust class actions in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania after replacing a national law firm with 40 days left in discovery; we secured a settlement for a tiny fraction of the damages claim.
Represented Safeco Insurance Company as lead trial counsel in a putative nationwide class action in Madison County, Illinois, alleging conspiracy in the aftermarket replacement parts industry; successfully moved to have Safeco dismissed from the action.
Represented a Fortune 50 telecommunications company in the Middle District of Florida in a class action alleging RICO violations in connection with phone companies’ inclusion of allegedly fraudulent third-party providers’ charges on phone companies’ bills; we obtained dismissal of all claims brought by the putative class and successfully defended the dismissal in the 11th Circuit.
Represented Scientific Atlanta, a Cisco Company, in connection with a putative securities class action pending in the Eastern District of Missouri where the plaintiffs alleged that Scientific Atlanta violated Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 by entering into a business transaction with Charter Communications about which Charter allegedly made false statements to Charter's shareholders. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s ruling that there is no private cause of action for aiding and abetting liability under the federal securities laws.

Antitrust, Unfair Competition & Deceptive Trade Practices

Represented Equifax in an antitrust class action in the Central District of California alleging violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act by three national credit-reporting agencies; we achieved a dismissal of all claims, which the 9th Circuit affirmed.
Represented Equifax in another antitrust action in the Southern District of Ohio alleging monopolization and conspiracy violations; we achieved a dismissal of all claims, which the 6th Circuit affirmed.
Represented Certified Automobile Parts Association in a putative antitrust class action in the Northern District of California, twice obtaining dismissals of the claims on the pleadings; the case is now back at the trial court for the plaintiff’s third attempt to move it forward.
Represented Borden, Inc., in the defense of criminal bid-rigging prosecutions on the federal and state level, followed by several price-fixing class actions brought in the Northern District of Georgia by retailers in Florida and Virginia; we defeated class certification and/or obtained summary judgment in each action.

Breach of Contract and Warranty, Fraud & Consumer Statutory Claims

Represented a leading maker of wireless handsets in state court putative consumer class actions in Denver and Los Angeles, alleging consumer fraud and breach of warranty; we obtained dismissal of these suits.

Employment

Represented a leading telecommunications company before the 11th Circuit in a case where a class of its former sales representatives made claims for unpaid wages and unjust enrichment; we obtained an order from the 11th Circuit reversing class certification.
Represent another Fortune 50 telecommunications company in two consolidated class action suits in the Northern District of Georgia, one of which we had transferred from the Northern District of Alabama, where the plaintiffs claim that they have not been paid for overtime, allegedly violating the Fair Labor Standards Act; we successfully opposed the plaintiffs in the Georgia case’s motion for conditional certification. The Alabama plaintiffs then decided not to move for conditional certification.
Represent a leading IT staffing company in the Middle District of Florida in a case where the plaintiff contends that she, as well as a class she seeks to represent, is entitled to overtime pay for carrying a Blackberry for 72 hours per week and responding to messages during both her regular and “off” hours; we defeated class certification.

Environmental

Represented Continental Carbon Company in a putative environmental pollution class action in Alabama state court alleging diminution of property value and business losses; we defeated class certification.
Represented a leading specialty chemical manufacturer in a mass tort environmental class action in the Northern District of Georgia alleging personal injury and property damage claims allegedly caused by pesticide-related chemicals; we obtained dismissal of several claims and negotiated a highly favorable settlement.
Represent United States Pipe and Foundry Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Mueller Water Products, in the Northern District of Alabama in a putative class action filed against U.S. Pipe and four other defendants in Alabama state court alleging that the defendants’ foundry operations caused them personal injury and property damage; we removed the case to federal district court based on the Class Action Fairness Act, which the 11th Circuit affirmed.
Represent Flexible Products Company, a subsidiary of The Dow Chemical Company, in a putative class action in the Northern District of Alabama alleging that underground coal miners suffer respiratory problems due to exposure to certain products; we defeated the plaintiffs’ claims for wantonness/willfulness, fraudulent suppression, conspiracy and breach of warranty on 12(b)(6) grounds.

ERISA

Represented BellSouth Corp. and various individuals in the Northern District of Georgia against three class actions arising from investments in BellSouth stock through a 401(k) plan; we defeated class certification and obtained a favorable settlement.
Represented a leading database administrator in a class action filed in the Northern District of Georgia alleging breach of fiduciary duties under 29 U.S.C. Section 1132(a)(2), ERISA Section 502(a)(2), in relation to investment by a 401(k) plan in the client’s stock; we won dismissal of all claims and settled the case on very favorable terms.
Represented a leading network and communications company and several individual defendants in a class action filed in New Jersey district court alleging breach of fiduciary duties under 29 U.S.C. Section 1132(a)(2), ERISA Section 502(a)(2), in relation to investment by 401(k) plans in the client’s stock; we won dismissal of all claims, which the 3d Circuit affirmed.
Represented a Fortune 100 consumer products company in a class action filed in the Northern District of Georgia alleging breach of fiduciary duties pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 1132(a)(2), ERISA Section 502(a)(2), in relation to investment by a 401(k) plan in the client’s stock; we obtained a complete dismissal of the client and various defendants in this and two identical class actions.

Insurance

Represented Safeco Insurance Company in a nationwide class action alleging that Safeco willfully violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to give the statutorily required notice of "adverse action." The U.S. Supreme Court found in Safeco’s favor, and on remand, we obtained judgment in Safeco's favor.
Successfully defended Safeco Insurance Company in more than 40 putative class actions over the past decade, including original equipment manufacturer parts vs. after-market parts litigation, diminished value litigation, total loss litigation, installment service fee litigation, credit scoring/Fair Credit Reporting Act litigation, insured-to-value/replacement costs litigation, extended PIP coverage litigation, variable commissions litigation, medical payment litigation, Colossus litigation and hurricane coverage litigation.
Represented a Fortune 100 personal lines property and casualty insurer in the Eastern District of Louisiana in a putative class action alleging that the client’s use of credit-based insurance risk scoring was racially discriminatory and seeking damages and injunctive relief on several grounds; we won summary judgment.
Represented a Fortune 100 personal lines property and casualty insurer in the Middle District of Florida in a lawsuit seeking damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and anticipatory breach; we obtained a dismissal in the Middle District of Florida and then successfully defended the appeal before the 11th Circuit.
Represented a Fortune 100 personal lines property and casualty insurer in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in a putative class action seeking damages and declaratory relief for alleged violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act; we obtained dismissal in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, which the 3d Circuit affirmed.
Represented a Fortune 500 health and life insurer in a policyholder class action in Madison County, Illinois, alleging that pre-need life insurance policies are inferior to life insurance policies and do not maintain cash surrender values as promised; we negotiated settlement for a nominal amount on an individual plaintiff basis.

Products liability

Successfully defended a leading maker of wireless handsets in more than 20 consumer product cases in California, Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Alabama, Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, Michigan, Colorado, Ohio and Kentucky. Each case involved allegations that the client’s product contained a design or manufacturing defect that caused personal injury or property loss and that the client failed to adequately warn consumers of the product’s dangerous characteristic. We obtained favorable results in every case resolved to date.
Represented a leading shopping mall developer, owner and manager in litigation related to its gift cards in the Superior Court of Cobb County, Georgia; the court granted our motion to dismiss, a decision the Georgia Supreme Court affirmed.
Represented Denny's, Inc., in purported class actions in the Superior Court of New Jersey and the Northern District of Illinois involving allegations related to the sodium content of Denny's food; we won dismissal of these consumer fraud cases.
Represented a Fortune 100 consumer products company in a consumer fraud class action in the District of New Jersey related to a sparkling green tea beverage; we won summary judgment, which the 3d Circuit affirmed on appeal.

Securities

Represented a leading network services provider in the Northern District of Georgia in a securities class action filed against that company and certain of its former officers; the court dismissed the complaint due to the plaintiffs’ failure to satisfy the heightened pleading requirements that apply to Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act.
Represented a leading health management company and certain of its officers and directors in the Middle District of Tennessee in connection with a putative securities class action; we successfully opposed certification of the proposed class where discovery of the designated representatives revealed that they were subject to unique defenses under the securities laws that put them at odds with other class members, thereby rendering them inadequate and atypical under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
Represented a leading wholesale energy marketer and certain officers and directors in a putative securities class action pending in the Northern District of Georgia that alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act and Section 11 of the 1933 Act; the court dismissed all claims in the complaint with prejudice.
Represented a Fortune 500 bottling company and certain present and former officers and directors in a series of putative securities class actions in the Northern District of Georgia alleging violations of several securities laws; we won dismissal of the amended complaint, and we won dismissal of the second amended complaint with prejudice.

Greg Berlin | PFAS Litigation Trends

June 20, 2025

Environment, Land Use & Natural Resources partner Greg Berlin discusses recent trends in class action and multidistrict litigation involving PFAS.

Jamie George | Developments on Class Action Circuit Splits

March 24, 2025

Litigation & Trial Practice partner Jamie George discusses several prominent class action circuit splits and the trends for ascertainability standards, fail-safe classes, and the application of Daubert at the class certification stage.

Hyun Jai Oh | Artificial Intelligence Class Action Trends

December 24, 2024

Technology associate Hyun Jai Oh discusses the evolving legal issues associated with artificial intelligence relevant to users and developers alike, including intellectual property concerns and discrimination claims.

David Carpenter, Rachel Lowe, Gillian Clow | Litigation Update California Invasion of Privacy

September 25, 2024

Litigation & Trial Practice partners David Carpenter and Rachel Lowe and senior associate Gillian Clow discuss developing trends touching on the California Invasion of Privacy Act and what is on the horizon at the intersection of class action and privacy litigation.

Alex Shattock | Class Action & MDL Roundup: International Section

June 27, 2024

Litigation & Trial Practice counsel Alex Shattock introduces the Class Action & MDL Roundup’s International section, which covers significant class action developments in the EU and beyond. Alex discusses why it’s important for companies with any sort of an international presence to keep track of these burgeoning issues.

Blake Simon | Total-Loss Class Action Updates

December 12, 2023

Litigation & Trial Practice senior associate Blake Simon provides an update on total-loss class actions and discusses recent court decisions on this evolving area of the law.

Tracy Yao | How to Stop a Class Action Wave

June 27, 2024

Litigation & Trial Practice associate Tracy Yao discusses her experience working on a case involving consumer car leases that had the makings of a potential class action wave and the steps taken to avoid that from happening.

Drew Phillips | The New Definition of "Healthy" - Class Action Litigation Impact

March 22, 2023

Litigation & Trial Practice counsel Drew Phillips discusses the FDA’s new definition of “healthy,” how the changes will impact class action litigation, and what types of cases to expect as a result of these changes.

Sam Park | Olean v. Bumble Bee Revisited

September 30, 2022

Litigation & Trial Practice partner Sam Park revisits Olean Wholesale Grocery Cooperative Inc., et al. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC in light of the Ninth Circuit’s 2022 en banc opinion that overruled the 2021 three-judge panel opinion. Please see our previous coverage of the 2021 Olean opinion by partner Rachel Lowe.

SPAC-Related Class Actions

December 28, 2021

The number of special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) IPOs has skyrocketed. Securities Litigation partner Andy Sumner discusses the increase in SPAC-related class actions, issues to watch, and future litigation activity to look out for.

Alston & Bird / National Bar Association - Commercial Law Section Virtual CLE: What to Expect When You are Expecting an MDL

September 21, 2021

Multidistrict litigation (MDL) is a tool for managing complex litigation by transferring cases with common questions of fact to a single federal judge for coordinated proceedings. Though 28 U.S.C. § 1407 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure apply, thanks to the discretion given the MDL court, you should expect the unexpected!

At a minimum, as a corporate defendant, you should expect (1) more case management orders and attorney committees than you could ever imagine on every conceivable topic; (2) formidable, coordinated, and well-financed members of the plaintiffs’ bar on the other side; and (3) years of challenging discovery and litigation before the first trial.

This CLE will provide guidance to corporate defendants on navigating MDLs, share best practices and strategies for defending and winning MDLs, and address recent trends that every corporate defendant should know when facing an MDL.

This program is provided as a complimentary service to clients and friends of Alston & Bird and to members and supporters of the NBA Commercial Law Section.

Rachel Lowe | Olean Wholesale Grocery Cooperative Inc., et al. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, et al.

June 24, 2021

Litigation & Trial Practice partner, Rachel Lowe, discusses how the Ninth Circuit’s opinion vacating and remanding the district court’s opinion in Olean Wholesale Grocery Cooperative Inc., et al. v. Bumble Bee Foods LLC, et al. will impact the courts in future class actions.

Derin Dickerson | The TCPA Class Action Train Keeps Rolling . . . For Now

September 17, 2020

Class Action & Multidistrict Litigation partner Derin Dickerson discusses the Supreme Court’s decision in Barr v. AAPC, which challenged the constitutionality of the TCPA. Derin analyzes the decision’s impact on the TCPA and the potential changes to come as the Supreme Court gears up to address another TCPA issue in the next term.

Alan Pryor | Federal Circuit Courts Weigh In on Personal Jurisdiction Requirements in Class Actions

June 22, 2020

Litigation & Trial Practice senior associate Alan Pryor discusses how federal circuit courts have weighed in on whether nationwide class actions are constrained by Bristol-Myers Squibb personal jurisdiction requirements and the consequences to future cases with similar claims.

Contacts

Cari K. Dawson

Partner

Atlanta

Phone: +1 404 881 7766

Email: cari.dawson@alston.com

David Carpenter

Partner

Atlanta

Phone: +1 404 881 7881

Email: david.carpenter@alston.com

Highlights

                            Publication
                                                    June 24, 2025
                        Class Action & MDL Roundup | 2025 Q1 – Our terms define class
                    
                                In the latest edition of the Class Action & MDL Roundup, covering notable class actions from the first quarter of 2025, two UK actions fail to clear a low bar, a movie isn’t a video, and spam isn’t free. Plus, we have our usual coverage of lawsuits over drugs and pharmaceuticals, wage-and-hour rules, shareholder losses, and more.
                            

                        Press Release

                        November 13, 2024

                        Alston & Bird Earns “Powerhouse” Ranking in BTI Consulting Group’s 2025 Litigation Outlook
                    
                            Alston & Bird has been recognized in eight practice categories within BTI Consulting Group’s 2025 Litigation Outlook. This annual report is based exclusively on in-depth surveys and interviews with leading legal decision-makers.

                        Press Release

                        November 17, 2023

                        The American Lawyer Honors Alston & Bird’s Georgia-Based Litigators
                    
                            The American Lawyer’s senior editors and reporters honored Alston & Bird and its Georgia-based litigators for their work on high-stakes matters and exceptional lawyering. The accolade recognizes the best litigation department in Georgia, and also reflects the substantial involvement of the firm’s Georgia-based lawyers in matters and client relationships throughout the United States.

                        Video

                        July 13, 2018

                        Derin Dickerson | Fairness in Class Action Litigation: Change on the Horizon?
                    
                            Litigation partner Derin Dickerson weighs in on the Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act and its potential to dramatically change the landscape of class action litigation.

                        Video

                        July 10, 2018

                        Kathy Huang | Practical Counsel When Companies Face Consumer Class Actions
                    
                            Litigation partner Kathy Huang provides practical tips and an ideal approach for companies to take when facing consumer class actions.