On January 12, 2016, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of class cert. in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 USC 227 action on predominance and superiority grounds in the case Paul Gannon v. Network Telephone Services, Inc., et al., No. 13-56813, 2016 WL 145811 (9th Cir. Jan. 12, 2016). In Gannon, the plaintiff alleged that he called the defendants' phone sex service by accident, and quickly hung up. Nonetheless, plaintiff alleged that several weeks later he began receiving unsolicited text messages in violation of the TCPA. Defendants alleged incoming calls received ...
Numerous states have adopted statutory bans on "unfair" or "deceptive" trade practices. When state legislatures enacted those statutes, most of them decided to let consumers sue directly for damages. However, many state legislatures also barred consumers from bringing class actions under those state consumer-protection statutes. See, e.g., Ala. Code § 8-9-10(f) (barring class actions under Alabama's Deceptive Trade Practices Act); O.C.G.A. § 10-1-399(a) (barring class actions under Georgia's Fair Business Practices Act); Miss. Code § 75-24-15(4) (barring class ...
In Jamison v. First Credit Services, Inc., 2013 WL 3872171 (N.D. Ill. July 29, 2013), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied a motion for reconsideration filed by Plaintiff. Plaintiff's motion asked the court to reconsider its earlier denial of class certification of a Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") action. Jamison involves an alleged violation of the TCPA after a debt collector, acting on behalf of American Honda Finance Corporation, allegedly called Plaintiff's cellular telephone multiple times without consent. Plaintiff filed a ...
In Murphy v. DirecTV, Inc., --- F.3d ---, 2013 WL 3889158 (9th Cir. July 30, 2013), consumers brought a putative class action against DirecTV and Best Buy alleging violations of California's Unfair Competition Law and the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. Plaintiffs claimed that defendants purported to sell receivers and DVRs when, in fact, they were leased to consumers on unfair terms. Defendants moved to compel plaintiffs' claims to arbitration and the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California denied their motion on the ground that Discover Bank v. Superior Court, 113 ...
In Keim v. ADF MidAtlantic, LLC, 12-80577-CIV, 2013 WL 3717737 (S.D. Fla. 2013), the Southern District of Florida granted a motion to dismiss a TCPA class action complaint, holding that the defendants' Rule 68 offer of full potential relief to the named plaintiff rendered said plaintiff's individual claims moot and, in turn, that the Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims. The plaintiff in Keim filed a class action complaint for statutory damages and injunctive relief under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the "TCPA") for sending unsolicited commercial ...
In Suzanne Hill, et al. v. Midland Funding, LLC, et al., No. 1:12-cv-02397-CCB (D.MD. Apr. 16, 2013), Plaintiffs brought a putative class action against Midland Funding LLC (Midland) alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Maryland Consumer Debt Collection Act (MCDCA) and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act (MCPA). In support of their claims, Plaintiffs contend that Midland violated the FDCPA when it filed collection law suits against them listing the address of its parent company, an address at which the stated plaintiff in each lawsuit was ...
In Manno v. Healthcare Revenue Recovery Group, LLC, 2013 WL 1283881, 11-cv-61357 (S.D. Fla. March 26, 2013), Judge Robert N. Scola of the District Court for the Southern District of Florida certified a Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A)(iii), and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § § 1692e(11) and 1692d(6), class action over the objection of the Defendant. The Defendant objected to the Plaintiff's standing on both Article III constitutional grounds and based upon the alleged lack of statutory standing under the TCPA. The ...
The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided that a named class action plaintiff cannot prevent removal by stipulating to seek less than $5 million in damages before class certification, in Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, 11-1450, --- U.S. ----, 2013 WL 1104735 (Mar. 19, 2013). The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ("CAFA") provides federal district courts original jurisdiction over civil class action lawsuits when "the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5,000,000." 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332(d)(2). The class must have more than 100 members and those members must be ...