Sex Offender Approved as Class Representative in Modem Class Action Lawsuit

A small bit of encouragement came from a civil class action lawsuit, IN RE ARRIS CABLE MODEM CONSUMER LITIGATION, Dist. Court, ND California 2018.

Plaintiffs, a group of consumers, are suing cable modem manufacturer, Arris, in a class action lawsuit. The case has nothing to do with our cause, except that one of the class representative plaintiffs happens to be a person required to register as a sex offender.

Attorneys for Arris, suggested the individual is not a suitable plaintiff because of his status.

The Court (Northern District of California) came to his defense, saying, “a district court should find inadequacy “only where the representative’s credibility is questioned on issues directly relevant to the litigation or there are confirmed examples of dishonesty, such as a criminal conviction for fraud.” Not only did the Court find the individual’s sex offense (which was from 1993) irrelevant, but also likely inadmissible.

 


Discover more from Florida Action Committee

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

13 thoughts on “Sex Offender Approved as Class Representative in Modem Class Action Lawsuit

  • August 21, 2018

    If a parent is fighting for custody of his or her child, simply being a registered sex offender by itself is not enough to deny custody. This was established many years ago somewhere, yet today we still see this kind of argument on unrelated situations.

    I have yet to see anyone convicted of a misdemeanor for refusing an application for employment or housing based on sex offender status in some States, including the State of California. The Housing Urban Development, known as H.U.D. clearly states on their applications that sex offenders need not apply. This is FEDERAL dollars that pay for housing and opening discrimination and violating State laws is not acceptable, but it is acceptable because it is never punishable.

    Reply
  • August 21, 2018

    “only where the representative’s credibility is questioned on issues directly relevant to the litigation or there are confirmed examples of dishonesty, such as a criminal conviction for fraud.”

    Or even perjury, but a sexual offense ?? Nice try ! lol

    Reply
  • August 21, 2018

    Why is this news? Why should it matter if this person was a “sex offender”?

    Really at this point it’s like saying that even though the individual was black or gay they were “allowed” to join a class action suit…unbelievable!

    Reply
  • August 21, 2018

    That’s right, his status has nothing! to do with any of this. Well said by the Northern District.

    Reply
  • August 21, 2018

    That last paragraph is simply beautiful. Word for word.

    Reply
  • August 21, 2018

    thank God…… They are starting to listen

    Reply
    • August 21, 2018

      Amen 🙏🏿

      Reply

Comment Policy

  • PLEASE READ: Comments not adhering to this policy will be removed.
  • Be patient. All comments are moderated before they are published. This takes time.
  • Stay on topic. Comments and links should be relevant to this post.
  • *NEW* CLICK HERE if you have an off-topic comment or link.
  • Be respectful. Do not attack, abuse, or threaten. This includes cussing/yelling (ALL CAPS).
  • Cite. If requested, cite any bold or novel claims of fact or statistics, or your comment may be moderated.
  • *NEW* Be brief. If you have a comment of over 2,000 characters, please e-mail it to us for consideration as a member submission.
  • Reminder: Opinions and statements in comments are neither endorsed nor verified by FAC.
  • Moderation does not equal censorship. See this post for more information

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *