P.C. Richard Class Action Over Exposure of Credit Card Numbers Not Welcome in State Court
Class actions under FACTA for failure to protect consumers' credit card numbers have found federal courts less friendly since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in "Spokeo," which bars claims without actual damages.
January 23, 2019 at 05:10 PM
4 minute read
Kelley Drye & Warren has notched a victory on behalf of appliance retailer P.C. Richard & Son in a class action lawsuit over sales receipts that conveyed too much information about customers.
The ruling in Baskin v. P.C. Richard & Son could halt the spread of litigation for technical violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act of 2003 in state courts. FACTA provides statutory damages of up to $1,000 for each technical violation, a standard met when a retailer prints more than 5 digits of a customer's credit card number on a store receipt.
FACTA class actions have found federal courts less friendly since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2016 ruling in Spokeo v. Robins. Now, the P.C. Richard decision suggests that New Jersey courts aren't rolling out the red carpet either.
Judge James Den Uyl of Ocean County Superior Court granted the defense motion to dismiss the P.C. Richard case Jan. 17 on finding that individual treatment in small claims court, not a class action, is the optimal setting for FACTA claims. Den Uyl's decision relied on a 2011 Appellate Division ruling involving the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, Local Baking Products v. Kosher Bagel Munch. P.C. Richard's lawyer, William Gyves of Kelley Drye in Parsippany, argued that pursuing a FACTA class action in a New Jersey court is contrary to the Appellate Division's analysis of the superiority requirement of R. 4:32-1(b)(3) in Local Baking.
The Baskin case was brought on behalf of two New York residents and one New Jersey resident who claimed their sales receipts from purchases at P.C. Richard revealed too much of their credit card numbers. An earlier case filed on behalf of the New York plaintiffs in a New York federal court was dismissed in 2017 for lack of standing. Because state courts in New York are prohibited by statute from hearing FACTA cases, the New York plaintiffs partnered with a New Jersey resident to bring a case in New Jersey Superior Court.
None of the three plaintiffs suffered any actual harm from the allegedly noncomplying register receipts. P.C. Richard claimed that technical violations of FACTA are not appropriately adjudicated as class actions under New Jersey law.
The plaintiffs maintained that Local Baking should not apply because the TCPA is not analogous to FACTA. The TCPA has no requirement that violations be willful in order to seek recovery, and FACTA provides for fee-shifting, indicating the Legislature did not intend for such claims to be brought in small claims court by individuals representing themselves.
But there is no controlling authority in New Jersey concerning FACTA class action claims, Den Uyl said. Therefore, the reasoning behind the Appellate Division's decision in Local Baking is perfectly applicable to the instant motion.
He cited the Local Baking decision's statement that “by imposing a statutory award of $500, a sum considerably in excess of any real or sustained damages, Congress has presented an aggrieved party with an incentive to act in his or her own interest without the necessity of class action relief. Thus, it follows that the prevailing law in New Jersey is that adjudication of claims on an individual basis in small claims court is 'a far superior method to vindication of any rights and protection of the public than any certification or class action' in situations where a statutory damage award incentivizes a party to act in his or her own interest.”
Consequently, plaintiffs failed to satisfy their burden under 4:32-1 that a class action is superior to other methods of pursuing the claims at issue, Den Uyl said.
Den Uyl notes that New Jersey's judiciary provides help with the small claims process on its website and through an ombudsman in each county courthouse.
Gyves of Kelly Drye declined to comment about the ruling. He represented P.C. Richard along with Glenn Graham of the same firm. Lawrence Friscia of Friscia & Associates in Newark and Glendale, California, attorney Chant Yedalian, who represented the plaintiff and class members, did not respond to requests for comment.
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 AllAmazon's Audible Hit With Privacy Class Action Over Use of Tracking Pixels
NJ Workers Can't Sue for Alleged Employment Discrimination Over Marijuana Use, 3rd Circuit Rules
4 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 1'It's Not Going to Be Pretty': PayPal, Capital One Face Novel Class Actions Over 'Poaching' Commissions Owed Influencers
- 211th Circuit Rejects Trump's Emergency Request as DOJ Prepares to Release Special Counsel's Final Report
- 3Supreme Court Takes Up Challenge to ACA Task Force
- 4'Tragedy of Unspeakable Proportions:' Could Edison, DWP, Face Lawsuits Over LA Wildfires?
- 5Meta Pulls Plug on DEI Programs
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
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