Ratner v. Chemical Bank New York Trust Co

In Ratner v. Chemical Bank New York Trust Co., 54 F.R.D. 412, 414 (S.D.N.Y. 1972), the plaintiff, seeking class action status, sued the defendant for its failure to show on his credit card statement the "nominal annual percentage rate" in violation of TILA. 54 F.R.D. at 413. In denying the motion for certification, the court noted that TILA provided for a $ 100 minimum recovery and payment of costs and attorneys' fees; that allowing a class action would be inconsistent with the remedy specified by Congress; that the proposed recovery of $ 100 per violation for a class of 130,000 would be a "horrendous, possibly annihilating punishment, unrelated to any damage to the purported class or to any benefit to defendant"; and that the misconduct was at most a technical and debatable violation of TILA. 54 F.R.D. at 416. The federal district court denied a motion for class certification pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act of 1968 ("TILA"). Id. The court was persuaded that class action certification was inappropriate because the statute's provision for a $ 100 minimum recovery per violation plus costs and attorneys' fees provided adequate incentive for individual action and because the statutory damages would inflict horrendous punishment on the defendant. Id. at 416. In reaching this conclusion, the court listed as a factor that no other members of the proposed class had shown interest in the class action or filed a separate suit and the statute of limitations had run. Id. at 414.