Wade Grant v. Capital Management Services, L
449 F. App'x 598
9th Cir.2011Background
- CMS appeals district court remand order in a CAFA-based class action under TCPA and California UCL.
- Grant’s complaint alleges violations of TCPA and Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200 et seq. and seeks class recovery.
- CMS presented Florczak declaration claiming >10,000 calls to California cellular numbers and >1,000 calls to a debtor in California, suggesting large potential class and damages.
- Grant’s action provides at least $500 per violation, with potential class-wide damages exceeding $5,000,000.
- District court remanded, requiring CMS to admit liability, which the panel holds is incompatible with CAFA and Lewis.
- Panel reverses and remands for further proceedings consistent with CAFA and the controlling caselaw.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CAFA numerosity and amount in controversy were shown | Grant's claim evidences a class >100 and >$5M. | CMS failed to show automated dialing usage and precise class size from the complaint. | CMS sufficiently proved CAFA thresholds; remand reversed. |
| Whether district court erred by requiring admission of liability to remove | CAFA removal does not require concession of liability. | District court properly required evidence of liability to assess removability. | District court erred; CMS need not admit liability to remove. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lewis v. Verizon Communications, Inc., 627 F.3d 395 (9th Cir. 2010) (statutory damages and class-sized stakes support AIC considerations)
- Chabner v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 225 F.3d 1042 (9th Cir. 2000) (courts may consider statutory damages for AIC purposes)
- Guglielmino v. McKee Foods Corp., 506 F.3d 696 (9th Cir. 2007) (establishes CAFA threshold review framework)
- Spivey v. Vertrue, Inc., 528 F.3d 982 (7th Cir. 2008) (exemplifies consideration of potential class damages in AIC analysis)