Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01934/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-01934-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Jodell Gacy, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Gammage & Burnham et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 04-CV-1934-PHX-FJM

ORDER

The court has before it Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (doc. 18) and

Defendants' Notice to the Court that Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is Unopposed

(doc. 41).

I.

Plaintiff alleges that defendants, in attempting to collect debts incurred for medical

services, have violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") by implementing

a policy or practice of falsely representing the character, amount, or legal status of debts;

threatening to take action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken;

using false representation or deceptive means to collect a debt; collecting an amount that is

not expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law; failing to

state the correct amount of the alleged debt; and contradicting and overshadowing the

validation notice. Memorandum in Support of Class Certification at 2. These allegations

arose out of letters that plaintiff received from defendants regarding plaintiff's debts for

medical services, and which are attached to the class action complaint as exhibits A and B.

Case 2:04-cv-01934-FJM Document 49 Filed 12/16/05 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

II.

The requirements of Rule 23(a) and (b), Fed. R. Civ. P., must be met to certify the

class. Rule 23(a) requires that the class be so numerous that joinder of all members is

impracticable; that there are questions of law or fact common to the class; that the claims or

defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and

that the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.

Plaintiff alleges that defendants violated the FDCPA by mailing over two thousand

letters. Memorandum in Support of Class Certification at 3. The FDCPA claims are

common to all prospective class members because the letters are alleged to be identical in all

relevant ways, and the allegations arise out of the form of the letters, not the underlying

debts. Id. at 3-5. Gacy received the letters and has accepted the responsibilities of being the

class representative. Id. at 3; Declaration of Jodell Gacy at 2. Accordingly, plaintiff has

satisfied the requirements of Rule 23(a).

To satisfy Rule 23(b), a party must comply with one of its three subparts. Plaintiff

argues that it complies with two: 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3). Rule 23(b)(2) requires that 

"the party opposing the class has acted . . . on grounds generally applicable to the class,

thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with

respect to the class as a whole." Rule 23(b)(3) requires that "the questions of law or fact

common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only

individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair

and efficient adjudication of the controversy."

Plaintiff seeks monetary and declaratory relief. Class Action Complaint at 6. The

analysis with regard to requests for both forms of relief overwhelmingly hinges on whether

the letters at issue violate the FDCPA. Memorandum in Support of Class Certification at 8-9,

11-12. A class action is a good way to adjudicate this controversy as there are numerous

parties whose harm may be small individually, but may be substantial collectively, and which

may be efficiently resolved collectively. Memorandum in Support of Class Certification at

10. Moreover, there is no evidence of any factors that would militate against class

Case 2:04-cv-01934-FJM Document 49 Filed 12/16/05 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

certification. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). Plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of Rule

23(b)(2) and (3). Therefore, we grant plaintiff's motion for class certification (doc. 18).

III.

The class is defined as all persons to whom letters in the form of Exhibit A or B to the

complaint were sent by defendants in an attempt to collect a debt incurred for medical

services, and which were not returned undelivered by the U.S. Post Office during the one

year prior to the date of filing this action.

The class claims are those claims listed in Count I of the complaint.

Jodell Gacy is appointed class representative.

Richard A. Dillenburg and O. Randolph Bragg are appointed class counsel. Together,

they have demonstrated they have substantial experience in handling consumer claims, both

for individuals and classes. Declaration of Richard A. Dillenburg; Declaration of O.

Randolph Bragg. Counsel must fairly, adequately and efficiently represent the entire class.

Plaintiff is required to give notice by first-class mail to all prospective class members

that can be identified through reasonable effort. Plaintiff is required to bear the costs of the

notice. Defendants shall provide plaintiff with the names and addresses of the prospective

class members. Notice shall comply with the requirements of Rule 23(c)(2)(B), Fed. R. Civ.

P. Plaintiff shall confer with defendants concerning the wording of the notice, and parties

shall jointly submit the notice to the court for approval prior to mailing.

The parties are reminded that the deadlines set forth in the Rule 16 Scheduling Order

remain valid and shall be strictly enforced. To ensure that there are no delays, the parties are

required to comply with the following deadlines. Defendants shall provide plaintiff with a

list of names and addresses of the prospective class members no later than January 20, 2006.

The parties shall jointly submit the notice to the court for approval no later than January 20,

2006. Notice shall be mailed to prospective class members by first-class mail no later than

February 17, 2006. Prospective class members shall be alerted in the notice that they have

until March 31, 2006 to opt out of the class action monetary claims.

Case 2:04-cv-01934-FJM Document 49 Filed 12/16/05 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

Pursuant to Rule 23(g)(2)(C), Fed. R. Civ. P., counsel for plaintiff shall submit ex

parte and under seal a proposed budget for fees in the case, with projected time and expenses,

hourly rates and a comparison of the projected fees to actual damages, no later than February

17, 2006.

In light of these deadlines, the parties may wish to stipulate to an expedited briefing

schedule on defendants' motion for summary judgment.

The parties are warned that failure to comply with these deadlines, or failure to

comply with the Rule 16 Scheduling Order deadlines, may lead to decertification

pursuant to Rule 23(c)(1)(C), Fed. R. Civ. P.

IV.

IT IS ORDERED GRANTING Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (doc.

18).

DATED this 15th day of December, 2005.

Case 2:04-cv-01934-FJM Document 49 Filed 12/16/05 Page 4 of 4