Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Class Actions”

3rd Cir. Holds ATDS Must Have ‘Present Capacity’ to Autodial, Follows ACA Int’l

Following the D.C. Circuit’s ruling in ACA Int’l v. FCC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently held that an “automatic telephone dialing system” under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act must have the present or current capacity to store or produce telephone numbers using a random or sequential number generator, and to dial those numbers. A copy of the opinion in Bill Dominguez v. Yahoo, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion.  The plaintiff purchased a cellphone with a reassigned telephone number.  The prior owner of the number subscribed to an email service provider’s “Email SMS Service,”…

9th Cir. Rejects ID Theft Putative Class Action for Lack of Spokeo Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a plaintiff did not allege Article III standing for her claim under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) where there were no specific factual allegations plausibly tying the inclusion of her debit card expiration date on her receipt to her alleged identity theft. Moreover, the Court held, leave to amend would be futile because this action against the National Park Service was barred by sovereign immunity. Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the district court dismissing the complaint. A copy of the opinion in Daniel…

9th Cir. Rejects FCRA Putative Class Action Relating to Short Sale Credit Reporting

In a putative class action alleging violations of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that: (1) the credit reporting agency’s reporting of short sales was not inaccurate or misleading, even though it knew that a government sponsored enterprise misinterpreted its short sale code as a foreclosure, because FCRA does not make credit reporting agencies liable for the conduct of its subscribers; (2) the credit reporting agency’s consumer disclosures were clear and accurate, and 15 U.S.C. § 1681g did not require the credit reporting agency to disclose its proprietary codes…

7th Cir. Rejects Banks’ Data Breach Claims of Negligence, UDAP Against Retailer

In a data breach putative class action brought by financial institutions against a retail grocery store chain, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that the economic loss doctrine prevented recovery of economic losses in tort cases. Although the financial institutions had no direct contractual relationship with the retail grocery store chain, the Seventh Circuit noted that the banks and the merchant all participated in a network of contracts that tied together all the participants in the card payment system. In so ruling, the Seventh Circuit joined the Third and First Circuits in rejecting negligence theory…

7th Cir. Holds Non-Cardholder Must ‘Directly Benefit’ to Be Bound by Cardholder Agreement

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that the minor child of a credit card account holder was not bound by the arbitration clause in the cardholder agreement because she did not become an authorized user of the account by using the credit card. The Seventh Circuit also held that the doctrine of estoppel did not bind the minor to the arbitration clause because the minor did not “directly benefit” from her parent’s use of the credit card. A copy of the opinion in AD v. Credit One Bank, NA is available at:  Link to Opinion. In…

9th Cir. Holds ‘Increased Risk of Future Identity Theft’ Sufficient for Standing in Data Breach Class Action

In a data breach putative class action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the plaintiffs sufficiently alleged Article III standing based on an alleged “increased risk of future identity theft.” In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit rejected the defendant’s argument that Clapper v. Amnesty International USA, 568 U.S. 398 (2013), in which the Supreme Court of the United States held “an objectively reasonable likelihood” of injury was insufficient to confer standing, required dismissal. A copy of the opinion in In re Zappos.com is available at:  Link to Opinion. In January 2012, hackers breached the servers of…

9th Cir. Holds No NBA Preemption for State Law on Escrow Accounts, TILA Escrow Account Rules Not Retroactive

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that the National Bank Act (NBA) did not preempt California’s state escrow interest law, which requires financial institutions to pay at least 2 percent simple interest per annum on escrow account funds. In so ruling, the Court also held that the federal Truth in Lending Act provisions for escrow accounts, at 15 U.S.C. § 1639d, did not apply to loans originated before the 2013 effective date of the provisions. A copy of the opinion in Lusnak v. Bank of America is available at:  Link to Opinion. In July 2008, the…

Calif. Supreme Court Holds Non-Intervening Unnamed Class Member Has No Right to Appeal

The California Supreme Court recently held that unnamed class members do not become parties of record under Cal. Code of Civil Procedure section 902, with the right to appeal the class settlement, judgment or attorney fees award, unless they formally intervene in the class litigation before the action is final. A copy of the opinion in Hernandez v. Restoration Hardware, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 2008, the plaintiff filed a class action law suit against the defendant, alleging the furniture company committed numerous violations of the California Song-Beverly Credit Card Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1747, et seq.,…

Calif. App. Court (1st Dist) Affirms Denial of Class Cert for Lack of Evidence Identifying Putative Class Members

The California Court of Appeal for the First District recently affirmed an order denying class certification because the plaintiff did not present evidence to demonstrate how putative class members can be identified from the defendant’s records. A copy of the opinion in Noel v. Thrifty Payless, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In July 2013, the plaintiff purchased an inflatable kids pool from a retail vendor.  The plaintiff based his decision to purchase the pool on the pool’s packaging, which showed a photograph of a group of three adults and two children sitting and playing in the pool.  The plaintiff…

Calif. App. Court (4th Dist) Upholds Denial of Class Cert, Rules Injunctive Claims Not Easier to Certify

The California Court of Appeal for the Fourth District recently affirmed an order denying class certification in a declaratory relief action because the plaintiff failed to establish ascertainability, predominance and superiority. In so ruling, the Appellate Court held that California Code of Civil Procedure section 382 did not have an equivalent to Rule 23(b)(1)(A) or (b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and that the federal rule provided less onerous requirements for declaratory or injunctive relief actions than for damages. A copy of the opinion in Hefczyc v. Rady Children’s Hospital-San Diego is available at:  Link to Opinion. In November…

6th Cir. Reverses Contempt Sanction Against Defendant That Thwarted Paying Plaintiff Class Counsel’s Fees

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently concluded that distributing all of a company’s cash to its owners after a class action settlement was reached but before the court’s order to pay became final, thus leaving the company without the ability to pay class counsel’s fees or administration costs as required under the settlement agreement, did not constitute contempt. The trial court had originally determined that the distribution of the money constituted contempt because the defendant had knowingly violated the court’s order to pay class counsel’s fees. The Sixth Circuit, however, concluded that a finding of contempt is limited to…

7th Cir. Upholds Class Settlement Despite Atty Fee Award in Excess of Award to Class

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held, over extensive objections by intervenors, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in approving a class action settlement, despite alleged problems with the class notice and the fact that the attorneys’ fees award exceeded the total award to the class. In so ruling, the Court rejected the intervenors’ argument that the proponents of a class settlement must file briefs in support of settlement before the deadline to object. A copy of the opinion in J.G. Goodman, et al v. American Express Travel Related Services Co. is available…