Print:Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

[sohanuzzaman56]

Third, the Court of Appeals assessed whether American Pipe tolling saved appellant Ari Weitzner M.D. P.C.’s individual claim. This corporation was not a named plaintiff in the state court action but rather a putative class member. However, because the company was not an “unaware, absent class member American Pipe was designed to protect” the Third Circuit held its claim was also time-barred. The Court noted that Weitzner was the sole shareholder in Ari Weitzner M.D. P.C., and as a result the company had actual notice of the pending state court action and the denial of class certification. Accordingly, tolling the company’s claim would “result in an abuse of American Pipe.”

The Third Circuit’s application of American Pipe in Weitzner v. Sanofi botim data user list Pasteur, Inc. makes clear that a named plaintiff from a putative class action may not later pursue a time-barred individual claim based upon the same conduct. The holding also stands for the proposition that a company that is owned and controlled by a named plaintiff in a putative class action may not take advantage of tolling the statute of limitations for a claim based upon the same conduct at issue in its owner’s original suit.

Photo of Mandi Blackmon
Mandi Blackmon
Mandi's Linkedin Profile
Photo of Ethan G. Ostroff
Ethan G. Ostroff
Ethan Ostroff’s practice focuses on financial services litigation and consumer law compliance counseling. Ethan is part of the firm’s national practice representing consumer-facing companies of all types in defense of individual and class action claims and counseling them on compliance with federal and