300 F. Supp. 3d 517
S.D. Ill.2018Background
- Plaintiffs are foreign nationals (Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama) alleging DBCP exposure on banana plantations and filed this suit in 2011–2012 after earlier, related putative class litigation beginning in Texas in 1993 (Carcamo/Delgado) and parallel actions (Hawaii).
- The 1993 Texas putative class action included a broad class definition covering persons exposed to DBCP abroad; before class certification was decided, the district court conditionally dismissed on forum non conveniens in 1995 but retained a return‑jurisdiction clause allowing resumption.
- A “Final Judgment” was entered Oct. 27, 1995; plaintiffs appealed and later pursued foreign forums; ultimately the Texas state court denied class certification in June 2010 and plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed the Texas action the next day.
- Chavez (this case) was filed in 2011–2012; claims were transferred to the Southern District of New York in 2017 after procedural moves through Louisiana and Delaware; Occidental moved for judgment on the pleadings arguing New York’s 3‑year statute of limitations bars the claims.
- Plaintiffs contend their claims were tolled from Aug. 31, 1993 (when Carcamo was filed) through June 3, 2010 by cross‑jurisdictional class‑action tolling (American Pipe principle applied to out‑of‑state putative class actions); Occidental argues New York would not adopt that doctrine and, even if it did, the 1995 orders terminated tolling.
- The Court predicts New York would recognize cross‑jurisdictional tolling and holds the 1995 dismissal and final judgment did not clearly end tolling; therefore plaintiffs’ 2012 suit is timely. The Court certifies the tolling question for interlocutory appeal under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether New York law recognizes cross‑jurisdictional class‑action tolling | New York would adopt American Pipe tolling for putative class actions filed in other states; absent class members reasonably rely on out‑of‑state class suits | New York would not expand tolling to out‑of‑state class actions; adopting it would invite forum shopping and endless tolling | Court predicts New York would recognize cross‑jurisdictional tolling |
| Whether the 1995 Texas forum non conveniens dismissal terminated tolling | Tolling continued because dismissal was conditional and included a return‑jurisdiction clause; absent members reasonably relied on the ongoing class action | The 1995 dismissal and Oct. 27, 1995 Final Judgment disallowed class status and thus ended tolling earlier | Court holds the 1995 orders did not clearly disallow class status; tolling continued |
| Whether the Oct. 27, 1995 “Final Judgment” was final for tolling purposes | The judgment did not extinguish the possibility of class proceedings and left return jurisdiction intact | The label “Final Judgment” and subsequent appellate litigation show class claims were conclusively terminated | Court finds the Oct. 27 order did not unequivocally end the class claims or tolling |
| Whether Chavez (2012) is timely under New York law given tolling through 2010 | If tolling lasted to June 3, 2010, Chavez filed within New York’s 3‑year period and is timely | If tolling ended in 1995, Chavez is time‑barred | Court holds Chavez is timely because tolling ran through the 2010 denial of class certification |
Key Cases Cited
- American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538 (class‑action tolling principle for federal claims)
- Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. Parker, 462 U.S. 345 (tolling remains until class certification denied)
- Dole Food Co. v. Patrickson, 538 U.S. 468 (FSIA/instrumentality analysis affecting jurisdiction/removal history)
- Korwek v. Hunt, 827 F.2d 874 (2d Cir.) (American Pipe does not permit new class after definitive denial of class status)
- Giovanniello v. ALM Media, 726 F.3d 106 (2d Cir.) (tolling ends when class status definitively disallowed)
- Delgado v. Shell Oil Co., 890 F. Supp. 1324 (S.D. Tex. 1995) (forum non conveniens dismissal with return‑jurisdiction clause)
- Chaverri v. Dole Food Co., 896 F. Supp. 2d 556 (E.D. La. 2012) (limitations decision in related litigation)