J. Thomas Richie

Thomas Richie has defended dozens of class actions involving federal statutory claims, breach-of-contract, negligence, products liability, warranty, data breach, tax and financial services issues. He represents clients across industries, including insurance, retail, construction, defense, pharmaceutical, energy, environmental, finance, wireless communication, and manufacturing.

Firm/Organization: Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Blogs: Declassified, Financial Services Perspectives

Latest Articles

Declassified

It’s None of Your Business: Sixth Circuit Says Arizona Lacks Article III Standing to Intervene to Challenge a Class Settlement

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

October 21, 2019

Does a state, whose citizens are among the absent class members in a class action settlement, have Article III standing to challenge the supposed unfairness of the settlement? In Chapman v. Tristar Products, Inc., the Sixth Circuit said no. The Trial Court’s Decision Chapman involved a product liability class action against the manufacturer of allegedly defective lids for pressure cookers, which may have exposed users to possible injury. Some of the plaintiffs’ class claims…

Declassified

“Who’s Gonna Pay for All This?” Can Prevailing Litigants Have Their E-discovery Charges Taxed as Costs Against Their Losing Opponents?

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

September 12, 2019

Parties in today’s complex litigation world, and their counsel, need no reminder of the ubiquity of electronic discovery and the tremendous expense it occasions. Even before 2006, when “electronically stored information” (ESI) was expressly added to the federal rules, parties have had discovery obligations regarding electronic documents and data. E-discovery, and the costs associated with it, are not going away. (By some estimates, the volume of data existing in the world doubles every two years.)…

Declassified

One Spam Text Does Not Confer Standing in the Eleventh Circuit

By J. Thomas Richie & Dylan C. Black

September 9, 2019

One unwanted text message does not confer standing in federal court in the Eleventh Circuit — so holds the court in Salcedo v. Hanna. The case confirms that one text message is qualitatively, and jurisprudentially, different from the kind of intrusions that give rise to an Article III injury-in-fact. The plaintiff in Salcedo claimed that he received a single unsolicited text message for a discount on legal services from his former lawyer. He brought…

Declassified

A Quick Study in Doxing and Personal Jurisdiction: Vangheluwe v. GotNews

By John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

September 5, 2019

In the digital age, the internet not infrequently stretches the bounds of traditional jurisprudence and raises tricky new questions. An example from earlier this year is Vangheluwe v. GotNews, LLC, where a federal court in Michigan grappled with this question: How significant to personal jurisdiction is “doxing” a resident of the forum state? The Eastern District of Michigan’s shorthand answer is: It all depends on the dox. What is Doxing? Doxing (sometimes spelled “doxxing”)…

Declassified

Ask and You Shall Be Deemed to Have Consented to Receive: The Eleventh Circuit Affirms TCPA Fax Summary Judgment

By J. Thomas Richie & Dylan C. Black

August 29, 2019

Consent is the most powerful weapon companies have against TCPA liability, and a recent Eleventh Circuit opinion illustrates how. In Gorss Motels, Inc. v. Safemark Systems, L.P., the Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment where the plaintiffs consented to receive solicitations in their franchise agreements. The background: Gorss and another company, E&G, operate hotels as franchisees of the Wyndham Hotel Group. In the franchise agreement, they agreed that Wyndham and its affiliates could offer assistance…

Declassified

Yes, But Were You Hurt? Another Data Breach Case Dismissed for Lack of Damages

By J. Thomas Richie & John E. Goodman

August 27, 2019

While a war rages on the issue of standing in data breach cases, the need to prove damages is presenting an even greater hurdle for plaintiffs, as we have noted previously. One clear illustration of this trend is Attias v. CareFirst, Inc., a case that involves both standing and damages issues. Attias arises from a data breach at a health insurer that allegedly compromised policyholder information. The defense began by moving to dismiss for…

Declassified

The Eleventh Circuit Finds Class Rep Has Standing to Settle a FACTA Class Action

By J. Thomas Richie, John E. Goodman & Michael R. Pennington

April 29, 2019

Bucking a recent trend and departing from both the Second Circuit’s Katz decision and the Third Circuit’s Kamal decision, the Eleventh Circuit found that a plaintiff had standing to settle a FACTA claim on behalf of a class. This decision—Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc.—signals the continuing debate about what Spokeo means for federal statutory damages class actions. As is now familiar, FACTA (the federal “Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act”) prohibits merchants from printing…

Declassified

Lamps Plus v. Varela: It’s Lights Out for Class Arbitration under Ambiguous Arb Agreements

By Dylan C. Black, Michael R. Pennington, John E. Goodman & J. Thomas Richie

April 26, 2019

We have written before about the utility of class waivers in arbitration agreements as a defense to classwide arbitration. As we previously discussed, the U.S. Supreme Court decided in Stolt-Nielson S.A. v. AnimalFeeds Int’l Corp. that arbitration agreements that were silent on the question of class arbitration could not support the arbitration of class claims. Now, as we predicted, the court has taken the rule of Stolt-Nielson a step further, holding in Lamps Plus, …

Declassified

Another Punt: The Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in the Zappos Case

By J. Thomas Richie, Michael R. Pennington & Scott Burnett Smith

March 27, 2019

We wrote recently about how the certiorari petition in Zappos.com, Inc. v. Stevens was a possible vehicle to put the question of standing in data breach cases back before the Supreme Court. Alas, the Court denied the certiorari petition on March 25. Combined with the Supreme Court’s remand in Frank v. Gaos, those wishing for a landmark standing decision must wait a little longer. Given the small number of certiorari petitions granted, the odds…

Declassified

Frank v. Gaos: Remand, but Little Guidance.

By J. Thomas Richie, Michael R. Pennington & John E. Goodman

March 20, 2019

Today, the Supreme Court sent Frank v. Gaos back to the Ninth Circuit to address the issue of standing under Spokeo. Frank involved allegations of privacy violations. Plaintiffs brought class action claims against Google for alleged violations of the Stored Communications Act. The complaints alleged that when an Internet user conducted a Google search and clicked on a hyperlink to open one of the webpages listed on the search results page, Google transmitted information including…

J. Thomas Richie

It’s None of Your Business: Sixth Circuit Says Arizona Lacks Article III Standing to Intervene to Challenge a Class Settlement

“Who’s Gonna Pay for All This?” Can Prevailing Litigants Have Their E-discovery Charges Taxed as Costs Against Their Losing Opponents?

One Spam Text Does Not Confer Standing in the Eleventh Circuit

A Quick Study in Doxing and Personal Jurisdiction: Vangheluwe v. GotNews

Ask and You Shall Be Deemed to Have Consented to Receive: The Eleventh Circuit Affirms TCPA Fax Summary Judgment

Yes, But Were You Hurt? Another Data Breach Case Dismissed for Lack of Damages

The Eleventh Circuit Finds Class Rep Has Standing to Settle a FACTA Class Action

Lamps Plus v. Varela: It’s Lights Out for Class Arbitration under Ambiguous Arb Agreements

Another Punt: The Supreme Court Denies Certiorari in the Zappos Case

Frank v. Gaos: Remand, but Little Guidance.

Stay Connected

Company

Support

New to the Network