Hanlon v. Palace Entm't. Holdings, LLC

2 Citing cases

  1. In re Toys "R" U.S. -- Delaware, Inc. -- Fair & Accurate Credit Transactions Act (Facta) Litig.

    300 F.R.D. 347 (C.D. Cal. 2013)   Cited 16 times
    Finding Plaintiffs to be adequate class representatives based in part on declarations submitted with their reply memorandum

    Stillmock v. Weis Markets, Inc., 385 F.Appx. 267, 274 (4th Cir. July 1, 2010) (Unpub. Disp.); see also Amchem Products, 521 U.S. at 617 (" The policy at the very core of the class action mechanism is to overcome the problem that small recoveries do not provide the incentive for any individual to bring a solo action prosecuting his or her rights" ); Hanlon v. Palace Entertainment Holdings, LLC, No. 11-987, 2012 WL 27461, *5 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2012) (" [T]his [FACTA] case represents an action in which the potential damages obtainable by an individual -- as low as $100 by statute and capped at $1,000 -- are likely too low to incentivize suit" ). Moreover, the fact that attorneys' fees may be awarded does not demonstrate that class-wide resolution is not the superior approach.

  2. Bush v. Calloway Consol. Grp. River City, Inc.

    Case No. 3:10-cv-841-J-37MCR (M.D. Fla. Mar. 26, 2012)   Cited 5 times

    Though the Eleventh Circuit has yet to examine this issue, courts considering whether to certify a FACTA class action on facts similar to those presented here have routinely found commonality. See e.g., Hanlon v. Palace Entm't Holdings, LLC, No. 11-987, 2012 WL 27461 (W.D. Pa. Jan. 3, 2012) ("This case could be a textbook example of commonality and typicality. The relevant facts - that [the plaintiff] received a receipt at the point of sale containing his expiration date - are straightforward and common to the class sought to be certified in every material way, particularly because the class excludes victims of identity theft."); Engel, 2011 WL 4091468, at *9 ("Factually, the claims depend upon the common contention that the defendant had a regular business practice of providing non-truncated receipts in violation of FACTA. Also, because the complaint does not state a claim for negligent violation of FACTA, 'the question of whether Defendant acted willfully is central both to Plaintiff's individual claim and to the claims of the class as a whole.