Leyse v. Lifetime Entertainment Services
- Amicus brief (07/21/2016)
This case was brought as a class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, based on a robocall made to thousands of people on behalf of Lifetime Entertainment. The district court denied class certification, finding that the class was not “ascertainable,” that is, that the court would not be able to determine who was in the class, because the parties had no list of the numbers called. The defendant then consented to relief that would fully satisfy Leyse’s individual claims, and the court entered judgment for the plaintiff on his claim.
On appeal, the plaintiff challenged the denial of class certification. Public Citizen, joined by the National Consumer Law Center, filed an amicus brief to address two points. First, the brief explained that the propriety of the district court’s denial of class certification was properly before the court on Leyse’s appeal from the district court’s final judgment, notwithstanding that that judgment was entered because the defendant consented to relief on the individual claim. Second, the brief argued that the district court erred by denying class certification on the ground that the class was not ascertainable. In a brief summary order, however, the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decisions.