White v. Imperial Adjustment

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-30740
KRISTEN K. WHITE, Individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
IMPERIAL ADJUSTMENT CORPORATION, et al;
Defendants
IMPERIAL ADJUSTMENT CORPORATION;
IMPERIAL FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY,
Defendants-Appellants.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Eastern District of Louisiana
(99-CV-3804)
June 10, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This is an appeal from the certification of a class under Rule
23 F.R.C.P. It is plain that the order certifying the class must
be vacated. Class members consist of “all persons whose consumer
reports were provided to Imperial Adjustment Corporation or
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Imperial Fire and Casualty Company for an impermissible purpose
under the Fair Credit Reporting Act for December 20, 1997"
(emphasis supplied). A class defined by persons injured by any
violation of the act, an act that can be violated in many distinct
ways, is too amorphous.
The able district judge may have intended the definition as a
shorthand for a discrete set of persons that the parties have
otherwise identified, such as those persons whose credit histories
were ordered by defendant in an effort to locate them. This is
surmise, and even it has its difficulties since it is not clear
that illegality even among such a defined group is determinable on
a class as distinguished from an individual basis.
We do not foreclose further consideration by the district
court of a possible class. We mention the “location” claimants
because although inadequate alone, it does have the virtue of
attempting to define a class injured by an act or practice, the
legality of which is at issue. Contrast, for example, the
difference between a class including “all persons injured by Acme’s
violations of the securities laws” and “all persons who purchased
the securities of Acme between X and Y dates.”1
VACATED and REMANDED.
1
See Forbush v. J.C. Penney Co., Inc., 994 F.2d 1101, 1105
th
(5 Cir. 1993).
2