Tennille v. Western Union Company
751 F. Supp. 2d 1168
D. Colo.2010Background
- Consolidated putative consumer class actions against The Western Union Company in D. Colorado alleging unjust enrichment, conversion, and consumer fraud.
- Plaintiffs allege Western Union failed to notify customers when transfers failed or went unclaimed and kept the funds and accrued interest.
- Western Union held unclaimed funds in interest-bearing accounts for years and retained the interest.
- Plaintiffs seek restitution, disgorgement, and damages; Western Union seeks dismissal and to avoid class certification issues.
- Court previously found subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) and warned about complex choice-of-law questions; order sets scheduling conference.
- Fraud claims may be dismissed, with oral argument scheduled; unjust enrichment and/or conversion claims survive for pleading purposes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do unjust enrichment claims survive despite potential contract | Tennille argues unjust enrichment applies | Western Union argues contract bars unjust enrichment | Unjust enrichment survives under multiple state laws |
| Do conversion claims survive | Plaintiffs allege wrongful retention and interest | Defendant disputes conversion elements | Conversion claims survive; tied to unjust enrichment viability |
| Are the claims time-barred or subject to laches | Injuries accrued as long as funds remained unclaimed | Limitations/laches apply to time-bar | Claims timely; not barred by limitations or laches |
| How does choice of law affect the claims | Missouri or Colorado law may apply | Law of states where customers reside applicable | Complex, not resolved; same result under argued states at this stage |
| What is the status of fraud claims | Fraud claims alleged | Fraud claims dismissed or narrowed | Fraud claims held in abeyance and scheduled for later argument |
Key Cases Cited
- U.S. v. Jefferson Elec. Mfg. Co., 291 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1934) (equity-like nature of money held for others)
- Robinson v. Colorado State Lottery Div., 179 P.3d 998 (Colo. 2008) (elements of unjust enrichment in Colorado)
- Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (plausibility standard for pleading)
- Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89 (U.S. 2007) (notice pleading standard; fair notice required)
- Ridge at Red Hawk, LLC v. Schneider, 493 F.3d 1174 (10th Cir. 2007) (plausibility standard; not merely possible facts)