Miller v. Bank of America

Good Law
152 Cal. Rptr. 3d 190·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 50·213 Cal. App. 4th 1·2013 WL 285554
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 25, 2013No. A132323California3,766 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Jenkins, J.

In this most recent iteration of this action, plaintiff Paul Miller appeals from the denial of his motion for class certification. We find the trial court correctly mled that the proposed class fails to satisfy the requirements for class action certification. We further find no merit in Miller’s claims that the Bank of America, N.A., is estopped from challenging his proposed class, that the court improperly made a premature mling on the merits, and that the case should have been remanded to allow additional discovery. Accordingly, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

I. From the Trial Court to the Supreme Court

We start with a brief history of how this case arrived here in its present configuration. The original lawsuit, filed in 1998 on behalf of a proposed statewide class, challenged the Bank of America’s (the Bank) allegedly unlawful practice of setting off funds from accounts into which Social Security and other public benefit payments had been directly deposited against overdrafts and bank fees. In 2001, the trial court certified a class defined as “All California residents who have, have had or will have, at any time after August 13, 1994, a checking or savings deposit account…

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.