Court Certifies Nationwide Class Action against UPS on Fraud Claims

Being a New Yorker, I am the last one to criticize people for sticking their nose into other folks affairs.

We New Yorkers keep a close eye out for any disputes with the British as an excuse to invade Canada, and when our hometown boy Aaron Burr wasn't lawyering he was busy planning to invade Mexico--or at least become King of Kentucky (wonder if Col. Sanders would have commanded Burr's militia?). We named our red-light district the "Crossroads of the World" and in the middle of it we set up lawn chairs in the street and have a naked cowboy from Ohio playing a guitar.

Compared to New Yorkers, them Canucks are models of propriety.

That being said, "USA" misses the point that BMM has a global audience (including a lot of Australians) and that Webster customarily gives an analysis which is accurate under US law.

It is one thing to criticize the accuracy of his analysis, but to criticize him merely for being Canadian is a bit odd if this was intended as a serious comment.

Besides, until we can get some folks from New Jersey to post on BMM, the Canucks are who we poke fun at.

We are in great haste to construct a magnetic telegraph from Maine to Texas. But Maine and Texas, it may be, have nothing important to communicate.

--Henry David Thoreau

Who is taking shots at our Canadian Franchise Expert,  Michael Webster,  who shares his expertise and  insight and views with all who read Blue Mau Mau.    Thanks for always articulate Richard Solomon who steps in and embarasses those who don't know what they are talking about and who defends a fellow attorney who tells the truth.    All of the Blue Mau Mau Attorneys,  i.e. Richard Solomon,  Paul Steinberg,  and Michael Webster can be depended upon to tell the truth ----and interestingly,   they now and then share a different perspective of the truth,  and share their valuable insight with readers of Blue Mau Mau.    

We,  who read  Blue Mau Mau,   have been educated to a degree about Class Actions in prior postings.    I really don't know anything about this new classs action,  or whether or not,  there is a newer lawsuit,  a classaction,   in the works by  The UPS Store  franchisees against MBE/UPS.     

The PSA lawsuit is due to hit the court again in August,  after a continuance,  and if there is another  continuance,  or a jury trial,  or a settlement,,  this will,  of course,  be interesting and relevant,  in some respects,  to the mass actions (The BSA Lawsuit)  in the the California federal courts.      

The PSA has been fighting in the Courts since 2003 and the BSA Class Action,  that became a Mass Action,  (agreed to by the parties and the District Court Judge) in the Federal Court was filed in 2006.    My understanding,  as a lay person,  and not as an attorney,  is that a federal Mass Action involves  belweather trials of representative plaintiffs picked by both the defendant and the plaintiff.    In the BSA Lawsuit,  eight Bellweather plaintiffs were dismissed in summary judgement by the District Court Judge,   who then decidided that he wanted to dismiss the entire 200 or more plaintiffs in individual summary judgements before the summary judgement could be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.    

It would be interesting if the attorneys would continue the discussion started on this thread as to the advantages and disadvantages of dismissing 200 or more defendants out of court in a summary judgement from the perspective of justice for both of the parties.      

is certified. In that notice there is an opt out opportunity given. If you don;t opt out you are in. In some state courts, if you don;t opt in, you are out. I don't know what court this ws in, state or federal. I am assuming the class action is in a federal court. If I am wrong, then I don;t have the answer.

--

Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com,  has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School