Ades v. Omni Hotels Mgmt. Corp.
United States District Court for the Central District of California
September 8, 2014, Decided; September 8, 2014, Filed
[*1002] CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Proceedings: DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 56
[*1003] I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs Steven Ades ("Ades") and Hart Woolery ("Woolery") filed the instant putative class action on March 15, 2013 in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Defendant in this action is Omni Hotels Management Corporation ("Omni"). Omni removed the case to this Court based on diversity of citizenship on April 8, 2013. Dkt. #1. Plaintiffs have since sought to substitute Jonathan Murphy ("Murphy") for Woolery as class representative. Dkt. #55, 59.
On April 29, 2013, plaintiffs filed the First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). The FAC asserts claims for relief pursuant to the California Invasion of Privacy Act ("***"), California Penal Code § 630 et seq. In brief, these claims assert that plaintiffs called Omni's toll-free telephone numbers and provided Omni representatives with personal information. FAC ¶¶ 16 - 17. Plaintiffs allege that when they placed their calls to Omni's toll-free telephone numbers, they were not apprised that the call might be recorded. Id. Plaintiffs further allege that [**2] Omni has a company-wide policy of recording inbound telephone conversations with consumers without seeking permission or informing consumers about the monitoring. Id. ¶¶ 18 - 19.
Omni filed a motion for summary judgment on July 30, 2014, Dkt. #63, and a corrected memorandum of points and authorities in support thereof on August 1, 2014, Dkt. #65. Plaintiffs filed an opposition on August 18, 2014. Dkt. #67. Omni replied on August 28, 2014. Dkt. #72. The parties appeared at oral argument on September 8, 2014. After considering the parties' arguments, the Court finds and concludes as follows.
II. BACKGROUNDRead The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
46 F. Supp. 3d 999 *; 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 129718 **
STEVEN ADES, ET AL. v. OMNI HOTELS MANAGEMENT CORP., ET AL.
Prior History: Ades v. Omni Hotels Mgmt. Corp., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179951 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 20, 2013)
recording, monitoring, out-of-state, regulation, callers, privacy, telephone, argues, legislative history, statutory damages, conversations, notice, dormant commerce clause, interstate commerce, exemption, residents, commerce, impaired, cases, court finds, extraterritoriality, consumers, damages, summary judgment, public utility, unambiguous, customers, contends, in-state, burdens