Classified Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Divergent Views on Class Discovery

December 7, 2016 by D. Matthew Allen

In two recent cases, California and Florida district courts reached divergent views on whether to permit wide-ranging class discovery prior to a certification decision. Interestingly, both decisions involved Ocwen companies. In Weiner, a RICO class action, the class plaintiffs sought discovery of defendants’ “internal communications relating to their decision to spin-off” a subsidiary because those communications ostensibly bore on “classwide intent to fraudulently conceal marked-up default-related costs from consumers.” The court rightly recognized that this discovery really went to the merits, not class issues. It accordingly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to compel.

In Fegadel, however, a day later, a Florida court granted in large part a motion to compel wide-ranging discovery in a Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act claim. The plaintiff alleged that a related Ocwen company improperly sought to collect debt from consumers who had received a discharge in bankruptcy over a two-year period. The court ordered discovery of the defendant’s practices and procedures regarding avoiding violations of the Florida statute. It denied discovery, however, of its practices and procedures regarding avoiding violations of related federal debt collection statutes. It further denied discovery of the identity of those individuals who filed bankruptcy, but granted discovery as to the identity of those individuals who received a bankruptcy discharge, named the defendant as a creditor, but received communications from the defendant. It further denied discovery of damages as not relevant to class certification issues.

The differences between the two orders may well relate to differing attitudes toward a wide-ranging RICO claim and a more narrowly tailored consumer debt claim. In addition, in Weiner, the court had bifurcated discovery into class and merits phases. There is no indication in Fegadel of any similar bifurcation.

Weiner v. Ocwen Financial Corp., 2016 WL 6897250 (E.D. Cal. Nov. 22, 2016); Fegadel v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 2016 WL 6893971 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 23, 2016).

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

Eleventh Circuit Clarifies CAFA Jurisdiction Continues After Dismissal of Class Claims

Next Article »

California Court Rejects Attempt to Overturn Judgment Based on Spokeo
D. Matthew Allen

About D. Matthew Allen

Matt Allen is a shareholder at Carlton Fields in Tampa, Florida.

Get Weekly Updates!

2020 Class Action Survey – Now Available!

DOWNLOAD NOW
Carlton Fields Logo A blog focused on the latest class action developments and trends by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Search

Topics

Industries/Practices
  • Construction
  • Consumer Finance & Banking
  • Food & Beverage
  • Health Care
  • Insurance
  • Labor, Employment & ERISA
  • Manufacturing & Products
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Privacy & Technology
  • Securities
  • Telecommunications

Substantive/Procedural
  • Arbitration
  • CAFA
  • Certification
    • Adequacy
    • Ascertainability
    • Commonality
    • Numerosity
    • Predominance
    • Superiority
    • Typicality
  • Decertification
  • Settlements
  • Standing
  • Striking of Class Allegations

Courts/Jurisdiction
  • Federal District Courts
  • Federal Circuit Courts of Appeal
  • United States Supreme Court
  • State Courts

Monthly Archives

Recent Articles

  • MDL Court Denies Class Certification of Proposed “NAS Babies” Class
  • What’s Good for Trial Is Good for Class Certification: Fifth Circuit Rules That Daubert Applies at Class Certification Stage
  • One Game, One Stadium: Eleventh Circuit Spikes Collateral Challenge to Tampa Bay Buccaneers Proposed Class Action Settlement

Get Weekly Updates!

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • Class Action Survey

Related Industries/Practices

  • National Class Actions
  • National Trial Practice
  • Appellate & Trial Support
  • Our Class Action Experience

Classified: The Class Action Blog

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact

Classified Logo
© 2014–2021 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.