You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Steigerwald v. BHH, LLC

Citations: 317 F.R.D. 615; 96 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 280; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154805; 2016 WL 6600424Docket: CASE NO.1:15 CV 741

Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio; November 7, 2016; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

This case involves a class action lawsuit initiated by Jeanne Steigerwald against BHH, LLC, Van Hauser, LLC, and E. Mishan and Sons, Inc., concerning allegations of fraud and breach of express warranty related to electronic pest control devices. The class action was filed in April 2015, and class certification was granted in February 2016, covering specific geographic and temporal parameters. Joanne Hart filed a motion to intervene in this action after filing a related case in New York, where some claims were dismissed while others proceeded. Hart sought to intervene under Federal Rules 24(a)(2) and 24(b)(1)(B), arguing that her interests were not adequately represented, particularly in light of newly discovered sales data. Her motion was opposed by both the plaintiff and the defendants, who argued that her intervention was untimely and unnecessary. The court agreed, ruling that Hart's intervention would cause undue delay and disruption, and found that her interests were adequately represented by existing parties. The court also noted that Hart could pursue her claims separately in New York if necessary. Consequently, her motion to intervene was denied, and the case proceeds under the previously established class certification.

Legal Issues Addressed

Adequate Representation in Class Actions

Application: Hart's claim of inadequate representation was rejected, as the court found that her interests were adequately represented by the existing class representative and counsel.

Reasoning: The Court recognizes Hart’s substantial interest based on her claims of breach of warranty and fraud but finds insufficient grounds for her to assert inadequate representation.

Class Certification and Scope

Application: The class certification granted covers individuals who purchased specific pest repellers between April 16, 2011, and April 16, 2015, excluding certain states.

Reasoning: The Court previously granted class certification for individuals who purchased ultrasonic pest repellers manufactured by Defendants between April 16, 2011, and April 16, 2015, specifically including the Bell and Howell brand.

Intervention under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24

Application: Joanne Hart's motion to intervene in the Steigerwald class action was denied based on the determination that her request was untimely and that existing representation was adequate.

Reasoning: Joanne Hart's Motion for Leave to Intervene in the class action case concerning electronic pest control devices has been denied by the Court.

Timeliness of Intervention

Application: The court found Hart's motion untimely as the case had progressed significantly, and her intervention would cause disruptions and delays.

Reasoning: Hart's request to intervene in the ongoing lawsuit is deemed untimely by both plaintiff and defendant.