Gold v. Midland Credit Management, Inc. et al

Filing 115

ORDER APPROVING 114 STIPULATION TO DECERTIFY CLASS AND ENTER JUDGMENT. Signed by Hon. Beth Labson Freeman on 3/25/2015. (blflc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/25/2015)

Download PDF
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 SAN JOSE DIVISION 6 7 ELLEN ANNETE GOLD, Case No. 13-cv-02019-BLF Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., et al., 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION TO DECERTIFY CLASS AND ENTER JUDGMENT Defendants. [Re: ECF 114] 12 13 14 15 Before the Court is the parties’ Joint Stipulation to Decertify Class and Enter Judgment. Stipulation, ECF 114. Rule 23(c)(1)(C) provides that an order certifying a class “may be altered or amended 16 before final judgment.” In the period before class notice, the Court’s certification order is 17 “inherently tentative” and may be freely modified in light of subsequent developments in the 18 litigation. Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 160 (1982) (quoting Coopers & Lybrand 19 v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463, 469 n.11 (1978)). 20 As set forth in the stipulation, the Court certified a class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil 21 Procedure 23(b)(3) on October 7, 2014. Thereafter, the parties could not agree on a form of notice 22 to the class and instead requested that the Court defer the issue of class notice until after ruling on 23 the parties’ motions for summary judgment. The Court granted summary judgment in 24 Defendants’ favor on March 20, 2015. The parties aver that “none of the approximately 43,942 25 prospective class members have been given notice by Plaintiff” and now seek to decertify the class 26 and enter judgment on Plaintiff’s individual claims. Stipulation at 2. 27 Because notice was never provided to the class members, Plaintiff never completed the 28 class certification requirements of Rule 23(c)(2). See Abels v. JBC Legal Grp., P.C., No. C04- 1 02345 JW, 2008 WL 782527, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 21, 2008). Furthermore, now that the Court 2 has resolved the legal question of liability in Defendant’s favor, requiring class notice would 3 violate the one-way intervention rule and be a costly exercise in futility. See generally 4 Schwarzschild v. Tse, 69 F.3d 293 (9th Cir. 1995) (discussing one-way intervention rule and 5 holding that “when defendants obtain summary judgment before the class has been properly 6 certified or before notice has been sent, they effectively waive their right to have notice circulated 7 to the class under Rule 23(c)(2); in such cases, the district court’s decision binds only the named 8 plaintiffs”). 9 As such, the Court approves the parties’ stipulation to decertify the class. The class certified on October 7, 2014 at ECF 80 is hereby decertified. Judgment shall be entered in favor 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 of Defendants and against Plaintiff. The Clerk of the Court shall close the case file. 12 13 14 15 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 25, 2015 ______________________________________ BETH LABSON FREEMAN United States District Judge 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?