Nadolenco has had a once-in-a-career kind of year: He won a high-profile Supreme Court case and he continues to represent Brazil — yes, the entire country.
"I'm definitely not coasting, but I definitely am on cloud nine to be sure," Nadolenco said. "Having those two cases happen in the same year was something pretty unexpected and spectacular."
Nadolenco found himself arguing the biggest case of his career when he took on Pasadena-based Spokeo Inc. as a client in an injury-in-fact case involving one of its users. A lot was on the line for Spokeo — which allows consumers to find basic information on individuals — and similar cases had ended in favor of the plaintiff. A loss for Spokeo could leave the tech industry vulnerable to a wide range of vague claims. Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. _ (2016).
"If we step back, we've always been looking for a way to defeat these no-injury class actions," Nadolenco said. "When you add them up, companies are facing billions of dollars in exposures. We used to argue that class action isn't the right way to proceed and the Ninth Circuit shut the door on that theory. So, we went back to the drawing board."
What Nadolenco and his team at Mayer Brown drew up was an argument for Article III standing. And a closer look through this lens was enough for the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the 9th Circuit's ruling.
"The injury-in-fact requirement requires a plaintiff to allege an injury that is both 'concrete and particularized,'" the court wrote in its dissention, citing Friends of the Earth Inc., et al v. Laidlaw Environmental Services Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000). "The Ninth Circuit's analysis focused on the second characteristic [particularity], but it overlooked the first [concreteness]."
The Spokeo case has already been cited in a number of proceedings involving class actions to argue the legal standard of the case being brought forward.
"To be certain, [the Supreme Court] made a pretty clear statement that it wants to put an end to no-injury class actions," Nadolenco said. "They're now looking for plaintiffs to allege concrete, real-world injury. Exactly what that means remains to be seen, but that's what I think the legacy [of the case] is going to be."
Nadolenco also represents Brazil in an ongoing battle to return a precious emerald to the country. But with the weight of facing nine Supreme Court justices off his plate, he's poised — win or lose — for another big year.
— Paula Lehman-Ewing
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com