Federal Judge Denies Class Certification in Hilton Robocall Lawsuit

A California federal judge has denied class certification for a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action lawsuit that was filed against Hilton Grand Vacations for allegedly making unsolicited calls to more than 6 million cell phones in four years.

U.S. District Judge Janis L. Sammartino said the Hilton class action lawsuit lacks commonality and predominance.

“(Hilton) argues that the putative class members in this action voluntarily provided their cell phone numbers in a variety of factually different scenarios, such that consent must be dealt with on an individual basis,” Judge Sammartino explains.

According to the class action lawsuit, numbers were acquired from those “who signed up for the Hilton HHonors loyalty rewards program over the phone, online, or by filling out a paper application” as well as several other possible scenarios.

“(Hilton) contends that a classwide trial on the merits would be untenable and would eventually degenerate into a series of individual trials,” the judge summarizes.

Judge Sammartino agreed with Hilton’s argument that the different ways that Hilton acquired the phone numbers allows for “dissimilar opportunities for the expression of consent” because the potential Class Members would have been given “different amount(s) of information regarding how his cell number would be used.”

Therefore, Judge Sammartino concludes, “this diversity suggests that the issue of consent should be evaluated individually, rather than a classwide basis.”

For a TCPA lawsuit to hold, plaintiffs must prove that the company they have brought the allegations against made solicitations through someone’s cell phone, that it made the calls using a robo-dialer and that the calls were made without prior consent of the person to contact them on their cell phones.

For a lawsuit to qualify for class certification, the plaintiff must also prove that the potential members have commonality, meaning that they all had the same problem, and that the class members claims are predominant, meaning that the charges are enough the same that a class action lawsuit makes more sense than individual lawsuits.

“Predominance in TCPA cases primarily turns on whether a class-based trial on the merits could actually be administered,” the judge explains.

Plaintiffs Brian Connelly and Keith Merritt initially filed the class action lawsuit in March 2012. They claimed that Hilton had used robocalls to make unsolicited calls to cell phones of potential class members — totaling about 54 million calls to over six million cell phones over four years. The suit could have cost Hilton up to $54 million.

The plaintiffs are represented by Charles T. Matthews, George S. Azadian and Zackey I Domb of The Mathews Law Group.

The TCPA lawsuit is Connelly, et al. v. Hilton Grand Vacations Company LLC, Case No. 3:12-cv-00599, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Southern California.

If you received unsolicited faxes, phone calls or text messages, legal options are available. Learn more and get a free legal consultation regarding a claim’s eligibility at the Text Message Spam, Cell Phone Call TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation. Experienced legal professionals are available to determine if you have case, so act now.

All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions