Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert
U.S. Supreme Court · decided February 26, 2019 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- February 26, 2019
- Term
- October Term 2018
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Sotomayor
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2018 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321 , 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus NUTRACEUTICAL CORP. v. LAMBERT CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 17–1094. Argued November 27, 2018—Decided February 26, 2019 Respondent Troy Lambert filed a class action in federal court alleging that petitioner Nutraceutical Corporation’s marketing of a dietary supplement ran afoul of California consumer-protection law. On February 20, 2015, the District Court ordered the class decertified. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f), Lambert had 14 days from that point to ask the Court of Appeals for permission to appeal the order. Instead, he filed a motion for reconsideration on March 12, which the District Court denied on June 24. Fourteen days later, Lambert petitioned the Court of Appeals for permission to appeal the decertification order. Nutraceutical objected that Lam- bert’s petition was untimely because it was filed far more than 14 days from the February 20…
Excerpt of a 23,598-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.