Judge Denies Cert. in Samsung Galaxy Class Action Lawsuit

Last month, a Texas federal judge refused to certify a Class of consumers who purchased allegedly defective Samsung Galaxy S smartphones, finding that the putative Class Members’ claims were not similar enough to be litigated as a class action lawsuit.

In 2012, three plaintiffs, Shane Galitski, Richard Taliaferro and Brian Newbold filed the class action lawsuit against cell phone maker Samsung for their allegedly defective Galaxy S model. On Aug. 28, presiding U.S. District Judge Sidney A. Fitzwater ruled that the proposed Class would not be certified and that the plaintiffs’ issues would need to be judged on an individual basis. The order was initially filed under seal, but it was unsealed Friday.

According to the Samsung Galaxy class action lawsuit, plaintiff Galitsky had issues with his Samsung phone just a few months after purchase. When he called Samsung about a different issue with the phone, he mentioned the power-off issue but Samsung did not address it. When Galitsky called a second time with a different problem, he mentioned the power-off issue again without help from Samsung.

All plaintiffs have claimed that when the phones are in standby mode, they freeze, shut down and power off at random times, making them unable to be used for their intended purpose.

“Contrary to plaintiffs’ position, common questions do not predominate in connection with their implied warranty claims,” Judge Fitzwater wrote in the order denying certification to the Samsung Galaxy class action lawsuit. “Rather, it will be necessary for the jury to consider whether each individual class member’s Galaxy S phone experienced the power-off issue at all within the one-year warranty period, and, if so, whether the power-off issue occurred with sufficient frequency to render the particular phone unfit for its ordinary purpose.”

The plaintiffs have also demanded disgorgement of all profits from the sale of the allegedly defective phones and demanded restitution as part of their request for relief. This information will have to be considered at an individual level as well, according to the court ruling.

As for the disgorgement of profits, the court said that having Samsung disgorge all profits from the phone for any potential Class Member who purchased the phone was not a typical remedy. The court said that most members had some benefit from their phones and many had full benefit of their phones, so disgorgement of all profits did not match up with what Class Members experienced overall with their phone’s utility and performance. A similar statement was made regarding restitution, and that refunding the full purchase price of the phone would constitute nonrestitutionary disgorgement which was is not allowed in California law.

The Samsung Galaxy class action lawsuit was originally filed in 2012 in California but was moved to the federal court in Dallas at Samsung’s request. This proposed Samsung class action lawsuit was at least the third that the plaintiffs have attempted to secure over the Galaxy S phones.

Judge Fitzwater summarized, “At oral argument, plaintiffs’ counsel recognized the necessity that plaintiffs prove an unlawful or unfair act. As applied to plaintiffs’ theory of liability, this requires proof that the phone the class member purchased was defective. Samsung is entitled to defend against this fundamental allegation on an individual class member basis, thereby leading to the unavoidable conclusion that individual questions will predominate.”

The plaintiffs are represented by William J. Doyle and James R. Hail of Doyle Lowther LLP, Thomas E. Glynn of Glynn Law Group, Alan M. Mansfield of The Consumer Law Group, and Mark R. Stanley of Stanley Iola LLP.

The Samsung Galaxy Class Action Lawsuit is Shane Galitsky, et al. v. Samsung Telecommunications America LLC, Case No. 3:12-cv-04782, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.