John E. Goodman

John Goodman has represented clients in complex litigation for more than 25 years. He has tried jury and non-jury cases in state and federal courts in Alabama, throughout the region and beyond. His practice is principally in the area of class action and mass action defense, having served as lead counsel in more than one hundred putative class actions and in more than twenty different states.

Firm/Organization: Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Blogs: Declassified, Financial Services Perspectives, Labor & Employment Insights

Latest Articles

Declassified

It’s None of Your Business: Sixth Circuit Says Arizona Lacks Article III Standing to Intervene to Challenge a Class Settlement

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

October 21, 2019

Does a state, whose citizens are among the absent class members in a class action settlement, have Article III standing to challenge the supposed unfairness of the settlement? In Chapman v. Tristar Products, Inc., the Sixth Circuit said no. The Trial Court’s Decision Chapman involved a product liability class action against the manufacturer of allegedly defective lids for pressure cookers, which may have exposed users to possible injury. Some of the plaintiffs’ class claims…

Declassified

Spam or Class Action Refund? Consumers Can’t Tell

By John E. Goodman & Kelsie M. Overton

October 3, 2019

Two recent studies by the FTC show that some methods for notifying potential class members of class action settlements are not as effective as courts and counsel might believe. In September, the FTC published a report on two studies it conducted surrounding the effectiveness of combined class certification and settlement notices. The Administrator Study compared characteristics of class action settlement administration, like notice methods and compensation amounts, to the settlement claim filing and payout rates.…

Declassified

“Who’s Gonna Pay for All This?” Can Prevailing Litigants Have Their E-discovery Charges Taxed as Costs Against Their Losing Opponents?

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

September 12, 2019

Parties in today’s complex litigation world, and their counsel, need no reminder of the ubiquity of electronic discovery and the tremendous expense it occasions. Even before 2006, when “electronically stored information” (ESI) was expressly added to the federal rules, parties have had discovery obligations regarding electronic documents and data. E-discovery, and the costs associated with it, are not going away. (By some estimates, the volume of data existing in the world doubles every two years.)…

Declassified

A Quick Study in Doxing and Personal Jurisdiction: Vangheluwe v. GotNews

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

September 5, 2019

In the digital age, the internet not infrequently stretches the bounds of traditional jurisprudence and raises tricky new questions. An example from earlier this year is Vangheluwe v. GotNews, LLC, where a federal court in Michigan grappled with this question: How significant to personal jurisdiction is “doxing” a resident of the forum state? The Eastern District of Michigan’s shorthand answer is: It all depends on the dox. What is Doxing? Doxing (sometimes spelled “doxxing”)…

Declassified

Yes, But Were You Hurt? Another Data Breach Case Dismissed for Lack of Damages

By J. Thomas Richie & John E. Goodman

August 27, 2019

While a war rages on the issue of standing in data breach cases, the need to prove damages is presenting an even greater hurdle for plaintiffs, as we have noted previously. One clear illustration of this trend is Attias v. CareFirst, Inc., a case that involves both standing and damages issues. Attias arises from a data breach at a health insurer that allegedly compromised policyholder information. The defense began by moving to dismiss for…

Declassified

“Sorry, Wrong Number”: Northern District of California Denies Certification in TCPA Class Action

By John E. Goodman

May 6, 2019

As we have noted before, whether a claimant under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) gave “prior express consent” to receiving communications from the defendant is frequently a critical issue (and often the only issue standing between the defendant and massive class action liability). A recent decision from the Northern District of California in a “wrong number” class action, Revitch v. Citibank, N.A., is illustrative of the consent battleground. The TCPA prohibits, inter…

Declassified

The Eleventh Circuit Finds Class Rep Has Standing to Settle a FACTA Class Action

By J. Thomas Richie, John E. Goodman & Michael R. Pennington

April 29, 2019

Bucking a recent trend and departing from both the Second Circuit’s Katz decision and the Third Circuit’s Kamal decision, the Eleventh Circuit found that a plaintiff had standing to settle a FACTA claim on behalf of a class. This decision—Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc.—signals the continuing debate about what Spokeo means for federal statutory damages class actions. As is now familiar, FACTA (the federal “Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act”) prohibits merchants from printing…

Declassified

Lamps Plus v. Varela: It’s Lights Out for Class Arbitration under Ambiguous Arb Agreements

By Dylan C. Black, Michael R. Pennington, John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

April 26, 2019

We have written before about the utility of class waivers in arbitration agreements as a defense to classwide arbitration. As we previously discussed, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Stolt-Nielson S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp. that arbitration agreements that were silent on the question of class arbitration could not support the arbitration of class claims. Now, as we predicted, the court has taken the rule of Stolt-Nielson a step further, holding in Lamps Plus, …

Declassified

Frank v. Gaos: Remand, but Little Guidance.

By J. Thomas Richie, Michael R. Pennington & John E. Goodman

March 20, 2019

Today, the Supreme Court sent Frank v. Gaos back to the Ninth Circuit to address the issue of standing under Spokeo. Frank involved allegations of privacy violations. Plaintiffs brought class action claims against Google for alleged violations of the Stored Communications Act. The complaints alleged that when an Internet user conducted a Google search and clicked on a hyperlink to open one of the webpages listed on the search results page, Google transmitted information including…

Declassified

Bristol-Myers Squibb Continues to Be a Mixed Bag in the Class Action Context

By J. Thomas Richie & John E. Goodman

December 20, 2018

Courts are still going both ways on applying Bristol-Myers Squibb to class actions. Two recent decisions highlight this split. The first—and we’ll always start with the good news—comes out of the District of Massachusetts in Roy v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. There, the court held that Bristol-Myers Squibb applies to collective actions under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and limited opt-in notices to drivers who worked in the forum state. In doing so,…

John E. Goodman

It’s None of Your Business: Sixth Circuit Says Arizona Lacks Article III Standing to Intervene to Challenge a Class Settlement

Spam or Class Action Refund? Consumers Can’t Tell

“Who’s Gonna Pay for All This?” Can Prevailing Litigants Have Their E-discovery Charges Taxed as Costs Against Their Losing Opponents?

A Quick Study in Doxing and Personal Jurisdiction: Vangheluwe v. GotNews

Yes, But Were You Hurt? Another Data Breach Case Dismissed for Lack of Damages

“Sorry, Wrong Number”: Northern District of California Denies Certification in TCPA Class Action

The Eleventh Circuit Finds Class Rep Has Standing to Settle a FACTA Class Action

Lamps Plus v. Varela: It’s Lights Out for Class Arbitration under Ambiguous Arb Agreements

Frank v. Gaos: Remand, but Little Guidance.

Bristol-Myers Squibb Continues to Be a Mixed Bag in the Class Action Context

Stay Connected

Company

Support

New to the Network