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 100 putative class actions and in more than 20 different states. John’s work in this area has covered a broad spectrum of substantive law, including securities, product liability, environmental, employment, contract and insurance class actions, and has likewise spanned a wide variety of industries. John has also litigated competition law issues, serving as lead counsel for businesses in more than 50 antitrust, intellectual property and noncompetition covenant cases. He has argued cases in both the Alabama Supreme Court and the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. John is recognized in The Best Lawyers in America® in the areas of class action defense and commercial litigation.
Listed in The Best Lawyers in America® Commercial Litigation, 2008-2024 Mass Tort Litigation / Class Actions – Defendants, 2013-2024 BTI Client Service All-Star, 2014 Listed in Mid-South Super Lawyers, 2022 Civil Litigation: Defense, 2017-2021 Listed in Alabama Super Lawyers, Civil Litigation: Defense, 2012, 2014-2015 JD Supra Readers' Choice Top Author 2019, Recognized as a Top 10 author for Class Action Infant formula antitrust litigation (Cir. Cts. Shelby, Calhoun, Mobile Cos., Ala.) This controversy, involving alleged price-fixing by infant formula manufacturers, resulted in three putative statewide class actions in Alabama state court. The courts in the first two cases denied class certification after extensive briefing and evidentiary hearings; the court in the third case voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice prior to reaching the class certification issue. The controversy resulted in the first ruling by an Alabama court that denial of class certification, if based on a ground other than inadequacy of representation, operates as res judicata as to the remainder of the class members as to class certification. Brand-name prescription drug antitrust litigation Ongoing for the better part of a decade, this litigation was centered in multidistrict proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. In addition to a nationwide class action there, the litigation included thousands of individual Robinson-Patman claims, and putative statewide class actions in nearly a dozen states. The firm, in addition to involvement in the nationwide proceedings, represented one of multiple defendants (the entire industry was sued) in four Alabama class actions. The Alabama litigation resulted in, among other things, the first denial anywhere in the nation of certification of a consumer class in this controversy, a decision of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals regarding aggregation of claims in the class action context, and a decision of the Alabama Supreme Court holding that the state’s antitrust statute does not apply to transactions in interstate commerce. Floyd v. Express Oil Change, LLC, 552 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (N.D. Ala. 2008) This putative class action involved claims that defendant (which faced statutory penalties amounting to multiples of its net worth) violated the federal Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA) by failing to truncate customers’ credit numbers on purchase receipts. The court held that FACTA as applied to the transactions at issue was unconstitutional, and dismissed the case. While the district court’s ruling (made in consolidated cases) was subsequently vacated on appeal, plaintiffs elected not to appeal that ruling with respect to the firm’s client. Vandenberg v. Aramark Educational Services and the Board of Trustees of the University of Alabama, 81 So. 3d 326 (Ala. 2011) This putative class action challenged, on antitrust and constitutional grounds, the University’s mandatory student dining program, operated by a private company. The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s grant of a motion to dismiss on the ground that the challenged program partook of immune state action immunity. William Gaudet et al. v. American Home Shield Corp. (E.D. La.) Nationwide class action challenging home warranty company’s claims handling practices. Class certification denied; individual claims settled. Faught v. American Home Shield Corp. (N.D. Ala.) Nationwide class action challenging home warranty company’s claims handling practices. Case settled on class basis over objection, and upheld on appeal. Injunction against prosecution of competing class action granted and upheld on appeal (660 F.3d 1289 (11th Cir. 2011)). Homestead 2000 v. Federal Express Corp. (Cir. Ct. Obion Co., Tenn.) Challenge to fuel surcharge by defendant on its customers; plaintiffs sought damages in excess of $100 million. Albe Conte, author of the treatise Newberg on Class Actions, testified as an expert for plaintiffs at class certification. Class certification denied; plaintiffs’ individual claims settled. Orange juice marketing class action litigation, 2013 WL 120716 (N.D. Ala. Jan. 8, 2013) These two putative nationwide class actions challenged defendants’ marketing of their orange juice as “all natural.” Plaintiffs’ effort to create an MDL defeated; motion to dismiss granted without leave to replead; no class certified. Dellaveccia v. Bayer Corp. (N.D. Ala.) Nationwide class action based on allegedly deceptive print and television advertising for aspirin. Claims asserted for fraud and deceptive trade practices. Class certification denied and case dismissed. Seroyer v. Pfizer (Cir. Ct. Chambers Co., Ala.) Nationwide class action based on allegedly deceptive print and on‑product advertising of dental rinse. Claims asserted for fraud and deceptive trade practices. Class certification denied and case dismissed. Custer v. HomeSide Lending, 858 So. 2d 233 (Ala. 2003) This nationwide class action involved a mortgage lender’s force‑placed insurance practices. Class certification was denied and summary judgment granted for defendant, rulings upheld by the Alabama Supreme Court. American Auto Ins. Co. v. McDonald, 812 So. 2d 309 (Ala. 2001) In this putative class action, the Alabama Supreme Court held that the lessees of rental cars had no private right of action against the rental car company for unlicensed sale of insurance. Naughton v. Corinthian Mortgage Corp. (E.D. Va.) Alleged nationwide class action asserting claims under Fair Credit Reporting Act. Summary judgment for defendant granted; no class certified. Metzger v. American Fidelity Assurance Corp. (W.D. Okla.) Putative statewide class contesting supplemental health insurer’s construction of policy language as to claims payment. Class certification denied at 249 F.R.D. 375 (W.D. Okla. 2007) on the basis of intraclass conflicts; subsequently settled. Abney v. American Home Shield Corp. (N.D. Ala.) Nationwide class action claiming that home warranty company’s payment of compensation to real estate agents violated RESPA. Case settled on class basis. Klutho v. Corinthian Mortgage Corp. (E.D. Mo.) Putative nationwide class challenging defendant’s “firm offer of credit” circular under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. Defendant’s motion to dismiss granted; no class certified. Roosevelt Hardaway, et al. v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC and Homecomings Financial LLC (U.S. Bankruptcy Ct., N.D. Miss.) Putative nationwide class action alleging improper proof of claim practices against creditor, seeking disgorgement of overpayments, turnover and sanctions. Settled on individual basis; no class certified. Luckie v. DirectBuy (Cir. Ct. Jefferson Co., Ala.) Putative statewide class action alleging that defendant improperly charged sales tax on shipping and handling charges in connection with out-of-state purchases. Motion to dismiss granted; no class certified.
