Garrido v. Money Store, No. 15-1891, 2016 WL 2956914 (2d Cir. May 23, 2016) (summary order)

Borrowers alleged that defendants made misrepresentations concerning fees that were charged in connection with their loans. The district court found commonality was not satisfied, because the documents containing the allegedly false statements were not routinely disseminated. The Second Circuit affirmed, noting that there was no evidence that class members received and relied on the same false representations. The mere fact that class members paid the disputed fees could not establish that they had done so based on common misrepresentations. View the decision.