Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 MARCH 2016

Second Circuit Holds That Class Action Seeking "Meaningless" Relief Shouldn't Be certified

Mayer Brown
Mayer Brown
Contributor
Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown

Mayer Brown is a leading international law firm positioned to represent the world’s major...

View firm profile
Explore more from Mayer Brown

We've often argued that when the principal rationale for approving a low-value class settlement is that the claims are weak, that is a signal that the case should not have been filed as a class action in the first place.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

We've often argued that when the principal rationale for approving a low-value class settlement is that the claims are weak, that is a signal that the case should not have been filed as a class action in the first place. The Second Circuit recently reached that exact conclusion when considering a proposed class settlement in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case, holding that the putative class couldn't be certified and that the FDCPA claims should be dismissed.

The decision

In Gallego v. Northland Group Inc. (pdf), a debt collector faced a class action under the FDCPA for allegedly sending borrowers a debt collection letter that gave a call-back number but didn't specify the name of the person at that number. As a matter of law, the claim seems dubious at best. But rather than incur the expense of filing a motion to dismiss, the defendant agreed to a class settlement. Under the deal, the defendant would pay plaintiff's counsel attorney's fees of up

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from