Chapman v. All American Painting, Inc.

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying plaintiff’s request for class certification in action alleging that defendant sent unwanted commercial faxes in violation of Telephone Consumer Protection Act, where: (1) Dist. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s prior attempt to define appropriate class members; and (2) plaintiff’s subsequent attempt to certify different class members came more than 18 months after close of discovery and more than four years after case had been filed. However, Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing plaintiff’s personal claim where defendant had made prior Rule 68 offer to settle said action for $2 more than plaintiff had sought in his complaint, and where defendant had put 14-day limit as to when plaintiff could accept said offer. While Dist. Ct. believed that plaintiff’s action was “moot” because he had declined offer that would have satisfied his financial demand as well as his demand for entry of injunction, instant case was not moot since Dist. Ct. still could have awarded damages and enter injunction at time of dismissal. Moreover, expired and unaccepted offer of judgment does not satisfy Supreme Court’s definition of mootness.