Dennis Murray Sr. Argues at the Ohio Supreme Court - Case No. 2012-0169 Stammco, LLC, d.b.a. The Pop Shop, et al. v. United Telephone Company of Ohio, d.b.a. United Telephone Co., et al.

February 27, 2013

Did Trial Court Err by Considering Merit Issues in Ruling That ‘Phone Cramming’ Lawsuit Cannot Be Pursued as Class Action?

 

The suit alleges the phone company Sprint is negligent in verifying charges added to customers’ bills - Stammco, LLC, d.b.a. The Pop Shop, et al. v. United Telephone Company of Ohio, d.b.a. United Telephone Co., et al., Case no. 2012-0169

Sixth District Court of Appeals (Fulton County)

 

ISSUE: In denying class action certification of a civil lawsuit brought by multiple customers against a phone company, did the trial court err by basing its decision on an evaluation of the merits of claims asserted by the plaintiffs, rather than on the compliance or noncompliance of the proposed class definition with the criteria for class certification set forth in Ohio Civil Rule 23?

See Dennis Murray's remarks at the Ohio Supreme Court:

http://www.ohiochannel.org/MediaLibrary/Media.aspx?fileId=138130

Learn about us  at Better Business Bureau Learn about the CMBA Green Initiative
Learn about Solar Array
Murray & Murray Co. LPA   |   111 East Shoreline Drive   |   Sandusky, OH 44870-2517   |   1-800-624-3009   |   419-624-3000
All Rights Reserved 2017, Murray and Murray - Admin Login   |   Sandusky Web Design by Alt Media Studios