Garrido v. Money Store, No. 15-1891, 2016 WL 2956914 (2d Cir. May 23, 2016) (summary order)
Borrowers alleged that defendants made misrepresentations
concerning fees that were charged in connection with their loans.
The district court found commonality was not satisfied, because the
documents containing the allegedly false statements were not
routinely disseminated. The Second Circuit affirmed, noting that
there was no evidence that class members received and relied on the
same false representations. The mere fact that class members paid
the disputed fees could not establish that they had done so based
on common misrepresentations. View the decision.
