Photo of Stephen Rees

Stephen Rees

Stephen Rees is a litigation associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. He has handled matters involving a range of issues, including class actions, antitrust, product liability, ERISA, insurance, breach of contract, and tort claims.

Stephen has experience in all stages of litigation, including:

  • dispositive motions;
  • fact and expert discovery;
  • class certification;
  • summary judgment;
  • mediation;
  • arbitration; and
  • trial preparation

Stephen has first-chaired fact witness depositions, drafted dispositive motions in both federal and state court, and argued hearings in federal court. In addition, he maintains an active pro bono practice, with an emphasis on immigration-related impact litigation and criminal law matters.

Contact:Read more about Stephen ReesEmail

In the latest false advertising decision regarding malic acid (see prior Inside Class Actions coverage here, here, and here), the Southern District of California dismissed with prejudice a plaintiff’s claim that defendant falsely advertised that its licorice was “naturally flavored” because testing allegedly showed that the product…

Continue Reading California Federal Court Dismisses False Advertising Suit Based on Malic Acid

The Fourth Circuit recently reinstated a wrongful death suit against a defendant, holding that the release in a settlement of consumer class actions against the defendant did not preclude plaintiff’s personal injury suit against that same defendant.  See In re Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Prod. Mktg., Sales Pracs. & Prod. Liab. Litig., — F. 4th —, 2024 WL 174363 (4th Cir. Jan. 17, 2024).  The Fourth Circuit’s decision is notable given that class members—including plaintiff—explicitly agreed to release all personal injury claims against the defendant, yet the Fourth Circuit held that the plain language of the release was limited by the “identical factual predicate” doctrine and allowed the class member to raise this challenge in a subsequent lawsuit.Continue Reading Fourth Circuit Holds That Consumer Class Action Release Does Not Necessarily Release Personal Injury Claims

The First Circuit recently vacated and remanded a district court’s approval of a proposed class action settlement “because the absence of separate settlement counsel for distinct groups of class members makes it too difficult to determine whether the settlement treated class members equitably.” Murray v. Grocery Deliver E-Servs. USA Inc.…

Continue Reading First Circuit Holds that Class Action Settlements Require Separate Counsel for Class Members with Significantly Different Claims