No Injury, No Problem? Supreme Court Sidesteps Critical Class Issue in LabCorp v. Davis

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court quietly walked away from one of the most anticipated class action cases of the year. In an 8–1 move, it dismissed Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings v. Davis, No. 22-55873, and declined to answer a deceptively simple, but incredibly important question:

Can a class action for damages under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 include people who weren’t actually injured?

The case arose from a lawsuit brought by two legally blind individuals under California state law alleging that LabCorp’s self-service kiosks were inaccessible to them. The law allows $4,000 in statutory damages per violation, meaning LabCorp’s exposure was easily in the hundreds of millions—a classic “bet-the-company” scenario.

LabCorp fought back, arguing the class was improperly bloated with people who hadn’t suffered any actual injury. But the Ninth Circuit let the certification stand anyway, citing its own precedent that says Rule 23 allows certification even when a more-than-minimal number of class members are uninjured.

The Supreme Court? It bowed out. By not deciding the issue, the Court left in place a messy, consequential split among the circuits:

• Strict Approach: The Second, Eighth, and parts of the Fifth and Sixth Circuits say uninjured people can’t be a part of a certified class as they lack standing under Article III.

• Rule 23 Sticklers: The D.C. and First Circuits allow some flexibility, but say a class fails if individual injury questions overwhelm common questions under Rule 23(b)(3).

• Permissive Camps: The Ninth, Seventh, and Eleventh Circuits take a looser view that class certification is okay even with many uninjured members, especially in statutory damages cases.

The implications are massive. In places like the Ninth Circuit, companies continue to face class actions with enormous liability based on alleged violations experienced by no one in particular. Venue shopping is more important than ever, and defendants may find themselves forced to settle weak cases simply to avoid a huge legal risk.

This was a golden opportunity for the Court to provide clarity. Instead, businesses, courts, and class counsel remain stuck navigating a high-stakes patchwork system where the answer to a constitutional question may change depending on your ZIP code.