On Tuesday, May 26, 2015 at 12:00 p.m. Central, Jason P. Stiehl, Giovanna A. Ferrari and Jordan P. Vick will present the first installment of the 2015 Class Action Webinar series. They will provide a summary of key decisions from 2014, identify key trends for companies to watch for in 2015, as well as practical
New California Appellate Decision Makes Class Certification More Difficult for Unauthorized Customer Call Recording Claims Under California Penal Code Section 632
By Robert B. Milligan and Christina F. Jackson
Plaintiffs’ attorneys have increasingly filed consumer class actions in California seeking to apply the state’s privacy laws to routine communications between businesses and their customers. If a company records or monitors inbound or outbound telephone calls with customers for calls made to or received by someone located
Individualized Inquiries Predominate in Call Recording Cases: California Court of Appeal Affirms Denial of Class Certification in Call Recording/Privacy Case Because Individual Issues Predominate Regarding Each Putative Class Members’ Expectation of Confidentiality
Summary
California Penal Code Section 632 has provided a springboard to litigation related to the recording of telephone calls in the State of California. Last week, in Hatisihi v. First American, Case No. B244769 (Cal. Ct. App. 2d Dist.), the California Court of Appeal affirmed the recent trend of class certification denials in
How To Tell A Mountain From A Molehill: Ninth Circuit Ponders Article III’s “Injury-In-Fact” Requirement In FCRA Case
“Injury-in-fact is not Mount Everest,” Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito once opined. The threshold to establish constitutional standing — which requires that plaintiffs establish an “injury-in-fact” — is low; so low that in most types of lawsuits, plaintiffs have no trouble scaling the requirement. While standing may not be Mount Everest, in consumer privacy lawsuits,
What’s On the Supreme Court’s Wish List? Stricter Scrutiny of Cy Pres Remedies in Class Action Settlements
Apparently, Chief Justice Roberts has added to the United States Supreme Court’s wish list: a case that would allow the Court to address the “fundamental concerns” surrounding the use of cy pres remedies in class action settlements.
What is Cy Pres?
A cy pres remedy provides indirect benefits to class members (usually through defendant donations
The Text and Legislative History of California’s Invasion of Privacy Act Suggest That the $5,000 Statutory Penalty Should Be Per Action, Not Per Violation
It is often assumed that the statutory penalty in civil actions under California’s Invasion of Privacy Act, Penal Code section 630 et seq. (“CIPA” or “Act”), is $5,000 for each instance of misconduct that violates the Act. (Some California courts have indeed indicated as much, though in dicta and without analysis.) 
Adopting such a
Did the California Legislature Intend for Penal Code Section 632.7, which Concerns the Recording of Communications Transmitted Over Cellular or Cordless Telephones, to Apply to the Parties to a Communication?
California Penal Code section 632.7 imposes criminal liability and, pursuant to Penal Code section 637.2, civil liability upon persons who intercept or receive a communication involving a cellular or cordless telephone and record the communication without consent. The section and its sister provision, Penal Code section 632, are popular among class action plaintiffs in California
Challenging Copyright Through Class Action: Should Happy Birthday be Free?
According to a documentary filmmaker, the answer to that question is a resounding “Yes.” Last week, Good Morning to You Productions Corp. (“GMTY”), a New York based film company, filed a class action lawsuit seeking to remove any purported copyright protection for the song “Happy Birthday to You,” as well as recovering all allegedly improper
Seventh Circuit Allows a Worldwide Privacy Class Containing Tens of Millions of Plaintiffs to Proceed to Trial as a Class Action
On Tuesday, June 11, 2013, the Seventh Circuit denied comScore’s appeal from the district court’s ruling granting class certification, thereby allowing a class of tens of millions of plaintiffs from around the world to proceed to trial as a class action suit. In re comScore, Inc., No. 13-8007 (7th Cir. June 11, 2013).
ComScore
Federal Court Denies Class Certification In California Call Monitoring Case
On April 8, 2013, the United States District Court for the Central District of California denied the plaintiff’s motion for class certification in Torres v. Nutrisystem, Inc., SACV 12-01854-CJC (JPRx), a lawsuit alleging Nutrisystem violated California Penal Code sections 632 and 632.7.
Penal Code section 632 prohibits the surreptitious recording of confidential communications made over