Tenth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Disability Discrimination Claims Against Postal Service

In Ransom v. United States Postal Service, the EEOC had granted relief on plaintiff's individual discrimination claim.  Later, after she filed class claims on behalf of disabled postal workers, the EEOC stated that she had to seek class counseling.  Finding that plaintiff had not done so witin the  forty- five day period allowed, the district court dismissed the complaint.  On Feb. 10 the Tenth Circuit affirmed, noting that "[f]ederal courts do not have jurisdiction to review Title VII and ADA claims not exhausted administratively" and held that plaintiff's failure to seek class counseling was a failure to exhaust those claims.  The court also held that claims should be dismissed because a pro se cannot litigate on behalf of a class.- A.S.

Illinois Supreme Court Dismisses State Farm Class Suit Filed in "Judicial Hellhole" for Forum Shopping

On November 17, Illinois' high court dismissed on grounds of forum non conveniens a class action suit against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. filed in Madison County, which the American Tort Reform Association designated as last year's "worst judicial hellhole".  Noting that the lead plaintiff was a Louisiana resident, the suit arose in Louisiana, and implicated Louisiana law, the Court ruled that private and public interest factors favored Louisianaas a forum.  The Court found that the lower court had abused its discretion in weighing so heavily the fact that State Farm's headquarters was in Illinois.  Tort reform advocates frustrated by class action forum shopping applauded the decision.  The suit alleged that State Farm fraudulently sold "total loss" cars without proper salvage titles.

Alabama Appeals Court Dismisses Class Claims; Refuses to Apply Class Action Tolling Rule

In Redman Homes, Inc. v. Surtees, the Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama affirmed the dismissal of claims brought by Redman Homes against the commissioner of the Alabama Department of Revenue, seeking refunds of franchise taxes declared unconstitutional. The dismissed claims were not timely filed, but plaintiffs claimed that the class action tolling rule (triggered by the filing in a different suit, Patterson v. Gladwin Corp.) applied to its claims. The Court held, however, that where members of the class know or should know that the administrative proceeding constitutes the exclusive method of obtaining the relief they seek, the class action tolling rule cannot operate to toll the statute of limitations for filing the administrative proceeding.- A.S.

Delaware District Court Dismisses Consolidated Class Action Against Zeneca Pharmaceuticals

On November 8, U.S. District Court Judge Sue L. Robinson (D. Del.) dismissed a consolidated class action against Zeneca Pharmaceuticals for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.  Pa. Emple. Benefit Trust Fund v. Zeneca, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27444.  The plaintiffs alleged that Zeneca’s marketing strategy of the drug Nexium misled consumers, resulting in “billions of dollars of unnecessary drug expenditures” and hundreds of thousands of patients unnecessarily taking Nexium. The plaintiffs sought recovery under three separate theories: 1) violation of the Delaware Consumer Fraud Act; 2) unjust enrichment; and 3) negligent misrepresentation. The court found none of the claims to be viable despite the permissive standards of FRCP 12(b)(6).