“A federal district court is required to entertain a class action once a plaintiff makes the required showings under Rule 23(b),” Judge Shelby wrote, adding that any state statute imposing stricter limits on class actions conflicts directly with Rule 23.
The judge relied on the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Shady Grove Orthopedic Associates PA v. Allstate Insurance Co., which held that federal courts must apply Rule 23 in cases where it conflicts with state class action restrictions. Under the two-step framework established in Shady Grove, Judge Shelby found that Rule 23 takes precedence and that Utah’s class action ban under Section 203(3) of NISNPIA does not alter the statute’s substantive rights or remedies.
Allegations of Unauthorized Data Sharing
The plaintiffs allege that Sundance failed to notify them or obtain their permission before sharing nonpublic personal information, including details of their online purchases, with data aggregators and other entities. The amended complaint claims these actions violated the Utah statute, which provides a remedy of $500 per violation.
