BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher

District Court of Appeal of Florida

BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher

894 So. 2d 1076, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2460, 2005 WL 475221

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 2, 2005

DocketNo. 4D04-2924

StatusPublished

This text of 894 So. 2d 1076 (BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher, 894 So. 2d 1076, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2460, 2005 WL 475221 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the non-final order of the trial court approving a limited class action against BellSouth, where Christopher is claiming on behalf of himself and other Florida consumers similarly situated that BellSouth improperly imposed a $3.50 per month “Roamer Admin Fee” (RAF) for calls made outside the BellSouth area. These proceedings occurred following our remand in BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher, 819 So.2d 171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

We have reviewed the trial court’s detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting class certification. We hold the trial court properly considered the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220(b)(3), and the applicable case law, in approving the class action. Finding no error, we affirm.

POLEN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the non-final order of the trial court approving a limited class action against BellSouth, where Christopher is claiming on behalf of himself and other Florida consumers similarly situated that BellSouth improperly imposed a $3.50 per month “Roamer Admin Fee” (RAF) for calls made outside the BellSouth area. These proceedings occurred following our remand in BellSouth Mobility LLC v. Christopher, 819 So.2d 171 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

We have reviewed the trial court’s detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law in granting class certification. We hold the trial court properly considered the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.220(b)(3), and the applicable case law, in approving the class action. Finding no error, we affirm.

POLEN, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

894 So. 2d 1076, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2460, 2005 WL 475221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bellsouth-mobility-llc-v-christopher-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack