962 F.3d 1160
9th Cir.2020Background
- Plaintiff Katie Van filed a putative class action on behalf of Alaska LLR customers who were improperly charged sales tax, asserting conversion, misappropriation, and Alaska UDAP claims.
- After a related suit, LLR refunded the erroneous tax charges; Van received $531.25 but was not paid interest for the time the funds were withheld.
- Van contends she is owed at least $3.76 in interest to compensate for lost use of the money.
- The district court dismissed for lack of Article III standing, ruling (on a ground LLR did not advance) that $3.76 was too trivial to confer standing.
- The Ninth Circuit reviewed standing de novo and considered whether temporary deprivation of money (loss of use/time value) is a concrete injury in fact.
- The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding loss of use of money is a cognizable Article III injury and remanded for further proceedings; costs awarded to Van.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether temporary deprivation of money (loss of use/time value) is an Article III "injury in fact" | Van: Loss of use of $531.25 (months to >1 year) is a concrete, particularized injury entitling her to interest as compensation | LLR: Full refund eliminates injury; any claim based on lost time value (interest) is too speculative and insufficient for standing | The court held temporary loss of use/time value of money is a concrete injury in fact; standing exists and dismissal reversed |
| Whether a plaintiff must plead specific plans to invest the withheld money to show injury | Van: Injury is the loss of use itself; she need not allege specific investment plans | LLR: Absent allegations how the money would have earned interest, injury is speculative | The court rejected the requirement to plead specific investment plans; interest is a measure of injury, not the injury itself |
Key Cases Cited
- MSPA Claims 1, LLC v. Tenet Fla., Inc., 918 F.3d 1312 (11th Cir. 2019) (held delayed reimbursement causes concrete injury via lost use/time value)
- Dieffenbach v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., 887 F.3d 826 (7th Cir. 2018) (unauthorized withdrawals causing temporary loss of use confer standing)
- Habitat Educ. Ctr. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 607 F.3d 453 (7th Cir. 2010) (time value of money withheld confers standing to challenge bond)
- Skaff v. Meridien N. Am. Beverly Hills, LLC, 506 F.3d 832 (9th Cir. 2007) (delay that is "too trifling" may not support standing)
- Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., 137 S. Ct. 973 (2017) (even small monetary losses ordinarily constitute injury)
- Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016) (concreteness inquiry considers historical analogues)
- Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (articulated Article III injury-in-fact requirements)