Court of Appeals Greenlights Class Action Against SunTrust for Overdraft Fees
Bickerstaff has alleged that the bank's $36 overdraft fee for sometimes tiny debits amounts to unreasonably high interest rates on small loans. As many as 400,000 customers could be class members, the lawsuit says, potentially costing the bank tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars.
March 11, 2019 at 11:13 AM
3 minute read
The Georgia Court of Appeals has upheld the certification of a class action lawsuit against SunTrust Bank alleging as many as 400,000 customers have been charged exorbitant overdraft fees.
Named plaintiff Jeff Bickerstaff Jr. filed the lawsuit in July 2010 challenging the bank's overdraft fees as excessive. Bickerstaff said SunTrust charged $36 when customers overdrew their accounts, even by small amounts, with debit card payments. The complaint claims the fees amount to interest rates as high as 1,000 percent and violate the state's banking and finance laws.
Bickerstaff alleged that approximately 400,000 Georgians had been overcharged in the same way and were “well suited for class treatment.”
“SunTrust argues that the trial court erred in (1) finding the class-action waiver unconscionable, and (2) granting class certification,” Judge Elizabeth Gobeil wrote in an opinion released Wednesday. “We affirm.” Gobeil was joined by Judges Brian Rickman and Chris Coomer.
The decision upholds Fulton County State Court Judge Susan Edlein in the certification of the class.
It's the third round of appeals for the case, which could potentially cost SunTrust tens or hundreds of millions of dollars. The bank lost an attempt to have the case dismissed after Bickerstaff died in 2015. But his mother and executor, Ellen Bickerstaff, took his place as named plaintiff. The bank also lost an appeal at the Georgia Supreme Court seeking to block the lawsuit by enforcing an arbitration agreement.
The case has drawn attention from legal scholars, who argue in support of the class, as well as banking and business interests on the other side. In briefs and during oral arguments in the previous round at the high court, attorneys told the justices their ruling could either kill class action or contract law in the state.
Michael Terry of Bondurant Mixson & Elmore argued the case for Bickerstaff.
“We are pleased that the court was so careful and attentive to this important case for Georgia consumers,” Terry said Thursday. “It has been nine years since we filed this case. It's long past time for a trial.”
William Withrow Jr. of Troutman Sanders represented SunTrust. Through a spokesman, SunTrust declined to comment.
“Like many banking institutions, SunTrust provides an automated overdraft program that allows an account holder's ATM or debit card transaction to be approved even if the approved amount exceeds the account holder's available balance. In other words, the customer has insufficient funds to cover the transaction and SunTrust advances the customer the necessary funds to cover the transaction, but, in return, charges the customer a flat fee per overdraft transaction. During the relevant time period, SunTrust charged a flat overdraft fee of $32 or $36 per overdraft transaction,” Gobeil said.
“In the complaint, Bickerstaff alleged that, on multiple occasions, SunTrust 'advance[d] money to Plaintiff in amounts less than $3,000 and collected Overdraft Fees from Plaintiff in connection with each such advance.' He maintained that SunTrust's overdraft fees in fact constitute interest charged by SunTrust for the use of the money SunTrust advanced/loaned account holders to cover overdrafts on their accounts, and that the rate of interest grossly exceeded the rate allowed under Georgia's usury laws,“ Gobeil said.
The case is SunTrust v. Bickerstaff, No. A18A1519.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSupreme Court May Limit Federal Prosecutions Over 'Misleading' but True Statements
After 2024's Regulatory Tsunami, Financial Services Firms Hope Storm Clouds Break
Alabama Man Arrested After Causing Bitcoin Price to Surge, Then Plummet After Fake SEC Tweet
3 minute readDefendant Awarded Increased Attorney Fees Six Months After Trial Win Against FTC
Trending Stories
- 1We the People?
- 2New York-Based Skadden Team Joins White & Case Group in Mexico City for Citigroup Demerger
- 3No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 4Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 5Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250