American Debt Foundation, Inc. v. Hodzic
312 Ga. App. 806
Ga. Ct. App.2011Background
- ADF is a Florida debt-negotiation company that previously operated in Georgia; Hodzic was one of nine Georgia residents who contracted with ADF for debt-reduction services.
- ADF's standard fee structure charged 14% of total debt, with about 10% of the estimated settlement paid upon enrollment; after several months, ADF would settle debts with creditors.
- In Hodzic's case (enrolled November 2005), ADF notified creditors but never forwarded any settlement payments; Hodzic made nine monthly payments and a down payment but received no settlements.
- Hodzic terminated the relationship after her debts defaulted; ADF refunded a portion of her payments, and Hodzic sued under OCGA 18-5-2, amended July 2003.
- Hodzic sought class certification for all Georgia residents who contracted with ADF for debt-reduction services; the trial court granted certification.
- ADF appeals the class certification, arguing lack of numerosity and superiority under OCGA 9-11-23.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Hodzic satisfy numerosity for class certification? | Hodzic argues a class of Georgia clients is impracticable to join. | ADF contends numerosity is met only if the class is sufficiently numerous to make joinder impracticable. | No; nine members insufficient to satisfy numerosity. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ford Motor Credit Co. v. London, 175 Ga.App. 33, 332 S.E.2d 345 (1985) (no absolute numerosity rule; context-specific inquiry)
- EarthLink, Inc. v. Eaves, 293 Ga.App. 75, 666 S.E.2d 420 (2008) (look to federal Rule 23 guidance for Georgia class actions)
- Gen. Tel. Co. of the Nw., Inc. v. EEOC, 446 U.S. 318, 330 (1980) (numerosity requires examination of case-specific facts; no absolute minimum)
- Sta-Power Indus., Inc. v. Avant, 134 Ga.App. 952, 216 S.E.2d 897 (1975) (illustrates factors relevant to impracticability of joinder)