Novelty & Loan Co.

16 Citing cases

  1. Wilcox v. Commerce Bank of Kansas City

    474 F.2d 336 (10th Cir. 1973)   Cited 99 times
    Holding district court did not abuse discretion when it denied class certification for TILA violations case where class members were not harmed and aggregate of statutory damages would be extremely large

    Katz v. Carte Blanche Corp., 52 F.R.D. 510, 53 F.R.D. 539 (W.D.Pa. 1971). Lamar v. H B Novelty Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Or. 1972). Martin v. Family Publications Service, Inc., Civil No. 5829 (D.Vt., filed June 30, 1970).

  2. Katz v. Carte Blanche Corporation

    496 F.2d 747 (3d Cir. 1974)   Cited 816 times
    Holding a controlling question of law encompasses "every order which, if erroneous, would be reversible error on final appeal" as well as questions "serious to the conduct of the litigation, either practically or legally"

    Trust Co., Civ. No. 6799-71-P (S.D.Ala., May 23, 1973); Griffin v. First Nat'l Bank, Civ. No. 6800-71-P (S.D.Ala., May 23, 1973); Hoffman v. Charnita, Inc., 58 F.R.D. 86 (M.D.Pa. 1973); Alpert v. U.S. Indus., Inc., 59 F.R.D. 491 (C.D.Cal. 1973); Richmond v. Railey's Appliance Center, Inc., 59 F.R.D. 641 (E.D.Va. 1973); Fisher v. First Nat'l Bank, Civ. Nos. 72-0-156, 82-0-157 (D.Neb., June 20, 1973); Turoff v. May Co., No. C71-948 (N.D.Ohio, July 23, 1973). Granted: Martin Alexander v. Family Publications Serv., Inc., No. 5829 (D.Vt., June 30, 1970); Richardson v. Time Premium Co., Civ. No. 70-1814 (S.D.Fla., Feb. 4, 1971); Douglas v. Beneficial Fin. Co., 334 F. Supp. 1166 (D.Ala. 1971), rev'd on other grounds, 469 F.2d 453 (9th Cir. 1972); Smith v. International Magazine Serv. of Mid Atlantic, Inc., Civ. No. 71-16-F (N.D.W.Va., Oct. 29, 1971); Katz v. Carte Blanche Corp., 52 F.R.D. 510, 53 F.R.D. 539 (W.D.Pa. 1971); Joseph v. Norman's Health Club, Inc., 336 F. Supp. 307 (D.Mo. 1971); La Mar v. H B Novelty Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Or. 1972); Flickinger v. Horseshoe Dev. Corp., Civ. No. 11-334-C-1 (S.D.Iowa, March 10, 1972); Kristiansen v. John Mullins Sons, Inc., 59 F.R.D. 99 (E.D.N.Y. 1973); Eovaldi v. First Nat'l Bank, No. 71 C 1654 (N.D.Ill., June 15, 1973), modifying 57 F.R.D. 545 (N.D.Ill. 1972); McDermott v. Hollander, 60 F.R.D 643 (E.D.La. 1973).Class Actions and the Truth in Lending Act

  3. Clark v. McDonald's Corp.

    213 F.R.D. 198 (D.N.J. 2003)   Cited 187 times
    Holding that "deterrence from visiting a place of public accommodation known to be out-of-compliance with the ADA can constitute an actual and present injury as surely as tomorrow's visit to the same location can constitute a threatened and imminent one."

    the Court is guided by Haas v. Pittsburgh National Bank, 526 F.2d 1083 (3d Cir.1975), and its progenitor, La Mar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Co., 489 F.2d 461 (9th Cir.1973). In La Mar, the named plaintiff initiated an action against all Oregon-licensed pawn brokers on behalf of all customers of such pawn brokers to recover penalties for the defendants' alleged violations of the federal Truth-In-Lending Act, although La Mar, the putative class representative, had only borrowed money from the first-named defendant, H & B Novelty & Loan Co. (" H & B" ). 55 F.R.D. 22, 23 (D.Or.1972). Initially, the district court ruled that La Mar could only represent a class of persons who, like him, had borrowed money from H & B. Id. at 23.

  4. Fertig v. Blue Cross of Iowa

    68 F.R.D. 53 (N.D. Iowa 1974)   Cited 8 times

              To be maintainable as a class action, the four requirements of Rule 23(a) must be satisfied, and the action must fall within one of the categories listed in Rule 23(b), F.R.Civ.P., McAdory v. Scientific Research Instruments, Inc., 355 F.Supp. 468 (D.Md.1973); In re Caesars Palace Sec. Lit., 360 F.Supp. 366, 396 (S.D.N.Y.1973); LaMar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Ore.1972); Thomas v. Clarke, 54 F.R.D. 245 (D.Minn.1971). It is plaintiffs' burden to show that the requisites of a class action are met. Danner v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 447 F.2d 159 (5th Cir. 1971); Cash v. Swifton Land Corp., 434 F.2d 569 (6th Cir. 1970); Demarco v. Edens, 390 F.2d 836 (2nd Cir. 1968).

  5. Bogosian v. Gulf Oil Corp.

    62 F.R.D. 124 (E.D. Pa. 1973)   Cited 40 times

    Cases have permitted class actions where there is a common course of conduct, which is said to ‘ predominate’ notwithstanding separate contractual terms. Lamar v. H & B Novelty Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Or.1972); Contract Buyers League v. F& F Investment, 48 F.R.D. 7 (N.D.Ill.1969); SeeAlameda Oil Co. v. Ideal Basic Industries, Inc., 326 F.Supp. 98 (D.Colo.1971).

  6. Haas v. Pittsburgh Nat. Bank

    60 F.R.D. 604 (W.D. Pa. 1973)   Cited 21 times
    In Haas plaintiff brought a class action against three banks to recover statutory damages for alleged overcharges of interest to their credit card holders. Plaintiff was the holder of credit cards issued and administered by only two of the three banks and had therefore dealt with only those two.

    Chevalier, et al. v. Barid Savings Association, et al., C.A. No. 72-1599 (E.D.Pa. March 7, 1973) and that portion of Samuel which permits named plaintiffs to proceed against Penn State and Temple are examples of this second type of judicial resolution of the problem. La Mar v. H. & B. Novelty and Loan Co., et al., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Oregon 1972), appeal docketed No. 72-1485 (9th Cir.), in which the District Court expressly recognized the problem and granted representative status notwithstanding, is by far the rarer instance. Some attention might well be paid to the practical aspects of what is basically a conceptual problem.

  7. Weiner v. Bank of King of Prussia

    358 F. Supp. 684 (E.D. Pa. 1973)   Cited 123 times
    Stating that NBA "regulates national banks and only national banks, which can be identified by the word `national' in their name"

    Kauffman v. Dreyfus Fund, supra, 434 F.2d at 734-737 But see, LaMar v. H B Novelty and Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Or. 1972), appeal docketed, No. 72-1485 (9th Cir.), in which a court used Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 to expand plaintiff's standing to sue under the Truth-in-Lending Act on the ground that a common issue of law existed as to the alleged class and the class action was designed for small claims. The LaMar decision is squarely contrary to the principles articulated in Kauffman (controlling in the Third Circuit) and the other decisions cited in the Kauffman text.

  8. Kristiansen v. John Mullins & Sons, Inc.

    59 F.R.D. 99 (E.D.N.Y. 1973)   Cited 32 times
    Finding allegations that a furniture chain store regularly entered into credit contracts using "printed sales and credit form" without disclosing, among other things, the method for calculating the finance charge and the sum of all periodic payments stated a claim for relief under the Truth In Lending Act and section 402(b)

    Corporation, 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,271 (S.D.Fla., April 12, 1971); Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc., 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,632 (S.D.Fla., November 27, 1970, rev'd on other grounds, 449 F.2d 235 (5th Cir. 1971), rev'd on other grounds 411 U.S. 356, 93 S.Ct. 1652, 36 L.Ed.2d 318, 1973); Gerlach v. Allstate Insurance Company, 338 F.Supp. 642 (S.D.Fla., 1972); Shields v. Valley National Bank of Arizona, 56 F.R.D. 448 (D.Ariz., 1972); Shields v. First National Bank of Arizona, supra ; Wilcox v. Commerce Bank d/b/a Bank-Americard, supra ; Garza v. Chicago Health Clubs, Inc., 56 F.R.D. 548 (N.D.Ill., 1972); Goldman v. First National Bank of Chicago, supra ; Kenney v. Landis Financial Group, Inc., 349 F.Supp. 939 (N.D.Iowa 1972); Kriger v. European Health Spa, Inc. of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 56 F.R.D. 104 (E.D.Wis., 1972). Class actions have been permitted in the following reported cases: La Mar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Company d/b/a H & B Loan Company et al., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Ore., 1972); Smith v. International Magazine Service of Mid Atlantic, Inc., 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,249 (N.D.W.Va., October 29, 1971); Martin and Alexander v. Family Publications Service, Inc., 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,267 (D.Vt., June 30, 1970); Katz v. Carte Blanche, 53 F.R.D. 539 (W.D.Pa., 1971); Berkman v. Westing-house Electric Corporation, 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,270 (N.D.Ill., June 25, 1971); Richardson v. Time Premium Company, 4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide ¶ 99,273 (S.D.Fla., February 4, 1971); Joseph v. Norman's Health Club, Inc., 336 F.Supp. 307 (E.D.Mo., 1971); Douglas v. Beneficial Finance Co. of Anchorage et al., 334 F.Supp. 1166 (D.Alaska, 1971), rev'd on other grounds, 469 F.2d 453 (9th Cir. 1972). Mullins further argues that a class action is not maintainable under Rule 23 because there is no showing that the class is too numerous to permit joinder, or that there are questions of law or fact common to the class, or that plaintiff's c

  9. Berkman v. Sinclair Oil Corp.

    59 F.R.D. 602 (N.D. Ill. 1973)   Cited 26 times
    In Berkman v. Sinclair Oil Corp. (N.D. Illinois 1973) 59 F.R.D. 602, 60[9], the court wrote: [¶] Furthermore, the substantial difficulty which would be encountered by the parties in proving various members of the class use their cards primarily for business rather than for personal use has already been demonstrated with regard to the named plaintiff, Adelman.

    Katz v. Carte Blanche Corp., 52 F.R.D. 510, 53 F.R.D. 539 (W.D.Pa.1971). Lamar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Or.1972). Martin v. Family Publications Service, Inc., Civil No. 5829 (D.Vt., filed June 30, 1970).

  10. Partain v. the First Nat. Bank of Montgomery

    59 F.R.D. 56 (M.D. Ala. 1973)   Cited 29 times
    Finding that superiority is a comparative requirement that presumes the availability of alternatives

    See, e. g., Wilcox v. Commerce Bank, 55 F.R.D. 134 (D.Kansas 1972); Rogers v. Coburn Finance Corp., 54 F.R.D. 417 (N.D.Ga.1972). Contra, LaMar v. H & B Novelty & Loan Co., 55 F.R.D. 22 (D.Oregon 1972); Katz v. Carte Blanche Corp., 53 F.R.D. 539 (W.D.Pa.1971), appeal docketed, No. 72-1054, 3rd Cir., Jan. 1972.           While the instant case can be distinguished from Ratner and other Truth-in-Lending cases in several ways, one difference is compelling.