Legal Opinion
Ballard v. Branch Banking and Trust Company
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 11, 2012No. Civil Action No. 2011-1327PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
ELLEN SEGAL HUVELLE, District Judge.
Daniel Ballard has instituted a class action against Branch Banking and Trust Company (“BBT”) because its automatic teller machine (“ATM”) lacked an on-machine fee notice, in violation of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA” or “Act”). 15 U.S.C. § 1693 et seq. Before the Court is his motion to certify a class of consumers who were charged withdrawal fees from the allegedly non-compliant ATM machine. For the reasons explained here, his motion is denied.
BACKGROUND
The EFTA seeks to ensure that operators of ATMs provide notice to consumers…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates, P.A. v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Richards, Constance v. Delta Airln IncCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Michael Rogers, et al. v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police, et al.District Court, D. Nevada · 2025