Experian Information Solutions, Inc. v. Superior Court

Good Law
138 Cal. App. 4th 122·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 459·2006 Daily Journal DAR 3824·41 Cal. Rptr. 3d 219
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 30, 2006G036211California4,307 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fybel, J.

INTRODUCTION

The trial court denied real party in interest (plaintiff) Mellonie Sorensen’s motion for class certification. Thereafter, on a motion by Sorensen pursuant to an earlier protective order by stipulation, the trial court approved a letter to former potential class members identified in discovery covered by that protective order. The letter would inform recipients they might have claims subject to running statutes of limitation and request each recipient’s consent to be contacted by Sorensen’s counsel to determine whether he or she had evidence relevant to the issue of Sorensen’s damages. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (Experian), filed a petition for writ of mandate, challenging the trial court’s approval of the letter.

We hold: (1) after class certification has been denied, a trial court cannot order notification of former potential class members of their possible legal claims; (2) the trial court did not abuse its discretion by concluding portions of the letter were reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence on the issue of plaintiff’s statutory damages; and (3) to be approved, the letter must be completely redrafted to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.