In Sandoe v. Bos. Sci. Corp., Civil Action No. 18-11826-NMG, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183886, at *9 (D. Mass. Oct. 23, 2019), Judge Gorton denied class certification of a TCPA wrong-number class. Implicit in Rule 23 is consideration of whether the identification of potential class members is "administratively feasible." Shanley v. Cadle, 277 F.R.D. 63, 67 (D. Mass. 2011). All… Read More
In Sliwa v. Bright House Networks, No. 2:16-cv-235-FtM-29MRM, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167805, at *56-63 (M.D. Fla. Sep. 27, 2019), the District Court denied class certification. Plaintiff identifies the following common questions of law or fact which he asserts will predominate over any individualized issues: whether (1) an automatic telephone dialing system or prerecorded voice technology was used; (2) Defendants'… Read More
In Moser v. Health Ins. Innovations, Inc., No. 17-cv-1127-WQH-KSC, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132790 (S.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2019), Judge Hayes certified a TCPA class. Under the TCPA, each plaintiff was injured when an autodialed or prerecorded call was sent to their wireless or residential phone. Whether the autodialed or prerecorded call came from a device located in the offices… Read More
In Revitch v. Citibank, N.A., No. C 17-06907 WHA, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72026, at *11-14 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 28, 2019), Judge Alsup denied class certification in a TCPA "wrong number" class action. District courts have split on the propriety of class certification in similar "wrong number" TCPA actions. Plaintiff heavily relies on a line of decisions that includes West… Read More
In McCurley v. Royal Seas Cruises, Inc., No. 17-cv-00986-BAS-AGS, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52173 (S.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2019), Judge Bashant certified a TCPA-telemarketing class. In the wake of Van Patten and McKesson, it is clear that the evidence Royal offers as evidence of consent "strongly affects" the Court's predominance analysis. McKesson, 896 F.3d at 932; see also Makaron, 324… Read More
The Court should have just denied class cert. But, having already certified a class, the Court had to then wrestle with a class notice with regard to an unascertainable class. In Lavigne v. First Cmty. Bancshares, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-00934-WJ/LF, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37724 (D.N.M. Mar. 7, 2019), Judge Johnson ignored those errors in the process and allowed a “reverse-lookup”… Read More
In Wilson v. Babcock Home Furniture, No. 8:17-C-02739-T-02AAS, 2018 WL 6660029 (M.D. Fla. December 19, 2018), Judge Jung denied class certification in a TCPA “wrong-number” class due to lack of ascertainability or common questions of law/fact. At the most fundamental level, the parties’ experts dispute the precise amount of “wrong numbers.” Based on Plaintiff’s analysis, Defendant made 8,253 calls marked… Read More
In Brodsky v. HumanaDental Insurance Co., 2018 WL 6295126, at *5–6 (7th Cir. 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied class certification in a TCPA Blast-Fax case. We agree with the D.C. Circuit (and the Sixth and Ninth) that, at a minimum, it is necessary to distinguish between faxes sent with permission of the recipient and those… Read More
In Lee v. Branch Banking & Trust Company, Civ No. 18-21876-CIV-Scola, 2018 WL 5633995 (S.D. Fla. Oct. 31, 2018), Judge Scola held that the SCOTUS’ decision in Bristol-Meyers did not bar the exercise of jurisdiction over non-resident putative class members in a TCPA class action. Next, BB&T argues that the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Bristol-Myers bars the Court from… Read More
In Tomeo v. CitiGroup, Inc., 2018 WL 4627386, at *9–12 (N.D.Ill., 2018), Judge Ellis declined to certify a wrong-number TCPA class. Here, Citi has put forth specific evidence establishing that a significant percentage of the putative class consented to receiving calls. Hansen intentionally avoided stating an opinion on the issue of consent in the Hansen Report, Doc. 121 Ex. 6… Read More
