Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Class Actions”

11th Cir. Splits from Other Circuits on Spokeo Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit sua sponte issued a new opinion to vacate and replace its prior opinion affirming approval of a class action settlement against a retailer for alleged violation of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act for printing more digits of his credit card number on a receipt than permitted under the act. Departing from contrary opinions by other federal appellate courts, the Eleventh Circuit’s new opinion offers an updated analysis of the plaintiff-appellee consumer’s standing to bring the action under Spokeo, holding that the risk of identity theft the consumer suffered was sufficiently…

Illinois App. Court (5th Dist) Upholds Dismissal of FDCPA and State Law Claims That 4-Yr UCC SOL Applied to Credit Card Purchases

The Appellate Court of Illinois Fifth District affirmed the dismissal of a borrower’s alleged putative class action alleging that the successor to a credit card issuer violated various state and federal laws when it filed suit to collect the debt past the four-year statute of limitations for the sale of goods under the Illinois version of the UCC (810 ILCS 5/2-725). In so ruling, the Appellate Court held that the issuer properly filed suit within the five-year statute of limitations that applies to credit card agreements under 735 ILCS 5/13-205.  In addition, the Appellate Court ruled that advancing money to pay…

Missouri Supreme Court Reverses Class Cert Due to Overbreadth and Typicality Issues

The Supreme Court of Missouri recently held that a trial court abused its discretion by certifying an overly broad class with a class representative whose claims against the debt collector defendant were not typical of the class. More specifically, the class definition was deemed overbroad because approximately 87 percent of the class members’ claims were either precluded by final deficiency judgments, or estopped by their failure to disclose the claims in bankruptcy, and the class representative failed to meet typicality requirements, because she did not suffer the same alleged injury as the class members. A copy of the opinion in…

SCOTUS Holds Ambiguous Agreement Not Enough for Classwide Arbitration

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States  recently held that under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), an ambiguous agreement cannot provide the necessary contractual basis for concluding that the parties agreed to submit to class arbitration. Accordingly, the contrary ruling of the Ninth Circuit was reversed and the matter was remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. A copy of the opinion in Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela is available at:  Link to Opinion. The defendant company sells light fixtures and related products.  In 2016, a hacker impersonating a company official tricked a company employee into…

SCOTUS Vacates Class Action Settlement Citing Spokeo

The Supreme Court of the United States recently vacated the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s approval of a class action settlement against a prominent technology company claiming violations of the Stored Communications Act. In so doing, the Supreme Court concluded that significant questions regarding the class plaintiffs’ Article III standing had not yet been adequately considered by the lower courts following its ruling in Spokeo v. Robins, 578 U.S. ___ , and remanded for consideration of whether any of the named plaintiffs has alleged SCA violations that are sufficiently concrete and particularized to support standing in federal…

SD Fla. Denies FDCPA Class Certification Due to Individual Issues of ‘Actual Damages’

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently denied a consumer’s motion for class certification in a putative class action against a debt collector. In so ruling, the Court concluded that the plaintiff consumer’s proposed class — which included members who did not make payments to the debt collector while also seeking actual damages as to proposed members who did make payments — presented individual issues concerning causation as to actual payments made in response to the collection letters at issue, and thus failed to overcome the predominance requirement under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). A copy…

7th Cir. Holds Mere Need for Extrinsic Evidence to Interpret Ambiguous Contract May Not Be Enough to Avoid Class Cert.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that merely requiring extrinsic evidence to interpret a provision of a form contract does not render class certification improper, and that absent a more thorough explanation of its reasoning from the trial court, it could not uphold the trial court’s ruling decertifying the class. As a result, the Seventh Circuit vacated the decision of the trial court and remanded for further proceedings. A copy of the opinion in Red Barn Motors, Inc. v. NextGear Capital, Inc. is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff auto dealerships entered into demand promissory note…

7th Cir. Holds Debt Collector Waived Arbitration by ‘Gratuitous Delay’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a defendant waived its right to arbitrate due to its “gratuitous delay” in seeking arbitration, where it waited 13 months after the filing of the lawsuit before moving to compel arbitration, and that any showing of prejudice to the non-moving party was not required. Accordingly, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the trial court’s ruling denying a motion to compel arbitration. A copy of the opinion in Smith v. GC Services Limited Partnership is available at:   Link to Opinion. The plaintiff applied for and received a credit card from a bank.  The credit…

11th Cir. Upholds Approval of FACTA Class Settlement Despite Non-Lodestar Class Counsel Fees, Other Issues

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a class settlement where the defendant allegedly violated the federal Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA) by printing point-of-sale credit card receipts that included more than the last five digits of the card number. In so ruling, and over the objections of two class members, the Eleventh Circuit held that :  Consistent with similar prior rulings from other federal appellate courts, the named plaintiff had Spokeo standing to pursue the claims, because the FACTA claims were similar to the common law tort of breach of confidence; and Class…

9th Cir. Holds Class Counsel Fee Award Improperly Failed to Treat Credits as ‘Coupons’ Under CAFA

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the trial court erred in awarding $8.7 million in attorneys’ fees in a class action settlement because it did not treat $20 credits issued as part of the settlement as “coupons” under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In so ruling, the Court held that, because the trial court included the full face value of the coupons in its calculation of the fee award, the “error require[d] recalculation of the fee award.” Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit vacated the trial court’s attorneys’ fee award. A copy of the opinion in…

8th Cir. Holds CAFA Amount in Controversy Includes Future Attorney’s Fees Incurred After Removal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a plaintiff could not defeat federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act based on a pre-class certification damages stipulation limiting attorney’s fees to ensure that the amount in controversy remained under CAFA’s $5 million jurisdictional limit. In so ruling, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s finding that the amount in controversy for jurisdiction under CAFA includes the amount of future attorney’s fees based on the expected length of the litigation, the risks and complexity involved, and the hourly rates charged. A copy of the opinion in Faltermeier v. FCA US…

9th Cir. Holds CAFA Amount in Controversy Includes Future Attorney’s Fees Incurred After Removal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a trial court’s order remanding a putative class action lawsuit to state court on the ground that the defendant removing party failed to prove that the amount in controversy exceeded $5 million, as required for jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that the amount in controversy for jurisdiction under CAFA includes all attorney’s fees that the plaintiff would be entitled to under a contract or statute, including future fees incurred after the date of removal. A link to the opinion…