4th Circuit Declines to Consider Dish Network’s “Premature” Appeal of District Court’s $11 Million Final Disbursement Order

As readers of this blog may recall, the Middle District of North Carolina recently denied Dish Network’s request for reversion of $11 million in unclaimed funds from the jury-awarded damages in a TCPA class action trial.  See Krakauer v. Dish Network, LLC, No. 14-0333 (M.D.N.C. Oct. 27, 2020). Noting that the TCPA is a deterrence statute, the District Court held that allowing unclaimed funds to revert to the defendant would undermine the function of the damage award, and it determined that such funds should either escheat to the government or be donated to an appropriate charity whose work is related to the objectives of the TCPA. But the District Court did not decide the ultimate recipient of the unclaimed funds, appointing a special master to identify and evaluate potential cy pres recipients and make recommendations to the court.

Now, in a roughly one-page order, the Fourth Circuit denied Dish Network’s appeal of the District Court’s final disbursement order.  See Krakauer v. Dish Network, LLC, No. 20-1077, No. 20-1198 (4th Cir. Dec. 1, 2020).  Notwithstanding that the District Court had denied in no uncertain terms Dish’s motion that the unclaimed funds revert to Dish, the appellate court determined that the appeal was not yet ripe, given that the issue of where the funds will go has not yet been decided by the District Court and therefore “Dish’s interest in the ongoing claims administration process is contingent upon the issue—not yet resolved in the district court—of whether any unclaimed class funds revert to Dish.”  Id.  It concluded that if the District Court resolved not to allow such a reversion, “then the errors that Dish assigns to the claims administration process will not have caused any injury to Dish.”  Id.  Thus, on both standing and ripeness grounds, the Fourth Circuit denied the appeal.

The $11 million question—who will ultimately receive the unclaimed funds—still remains to be seen. We will continue to monitor this case as it develops.

Bradley J. Andreozzi

About the Author: Bradley J. Andreozzi

Bradley Andreozzi defends clients in high-stakes civil litigation, with a particular focus on class action trials and appeals. Brad is among the relatively small group of lawyers who have tried class actions before juries. He also has won pretrial dismissals and defeated class certification in courts across the country and prevailed on appeal in defeating purported billion-dollar class claims. Brad has a reputation for innovative arguments that limit or defeat claims and for the strategic use of motion practice to position cases for an early cost-effective resolution or limit the size and exposure of the case should it move forward. In addition to his trial work, Brad has won appeals in virtually every federal appellate court, including the U.S. Supreme Court.

Vijayasri G. Aryama

About the Author: Vijayasri G. Aryama

Vijayasri “Sri” Aryama assists clients with various aspects of legal proceedings and trial preparation, including legal research and the drafting of motions and other legal memoranda. While attending Rutgers Law School, Sri interned at the Department of Homeland Security in the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division. She conducted legal research and drafted briefs, memos, and Motions to Reopen on complex matters of immigration law, including criminal law violations that could impact removal proceedings. During law school, Sri also worked as a tax compliance contractor for an international security systems company, where she reviewed and resolved state and city tax notices for numerous corporate entities and regularly tested internal controls to ensure Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. Sri was also a research and technology editor for the Women’s Rights Law Reporter.

©2023 Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP | All Rights Reserved | Attorney Advertising.
Privacy Policy