994 F.Supp.2d 98 (D.D.C. 2014), Civ. 04-1391 (RCL), Beck v. Test Masters Educ. Servs. Inc.

Docket Nº:Civil 04-1391 (RCL)
Citation:994 F.Supp.2d 98
Opinion Judge:Royce C. Lamberth, United States District Judge.
Party Name:JARROD BECK, et al., Plaintiffs, v. TEST MASTERS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES INC., Defendant
Attorney:Civil No. 04-1391 (RCL) For Jarrod Beck, Keerthi Reddy, Erin Galloway, Plaintiffs: Hassan A. Zavareei, LEAD ATTORNEY, TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP, Washington, DC. For Test Masters Educational Services, Inc., Defendant: Charles T. Jeremiah, LEAD ATTORNEY, CHAMBERLAIN HRDLICKA WHITE WILLIAMS & MARTIN, Hou...
Case Date:June 20, 2014
Court:United States District Courts, District of Columbia

Page 98

994 F.Supp.2d 98 (D.D.C. 2014)

JARROD BECK, et al., Plaintiffs,

v.

TEST MASTERS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES INC., Defendant

Civil No. 04-1391 (RCL)

United States District Court, D. Columbia

June 20, 2014

Page 99

For Jarrod Beck, Keerthi Reddy, Erin Galloway, Plaintiffs: Hassan A. Zavareei, LEAD ATTORNEY, TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP, Washington, DC.

For Test Masters Educational Services, Inc., Defendant: Charles T. Jeremiah, LEAD ATTORNEY, CHAMBERLAIN HRDLICKA WHITE WILLIAMS & MARTIN, Houston, TX; David John Schenck, LEAD ATTORNEY, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, Austin, TX; Kevin D. Jewell, LEAD ATTORNEY, CHAMBERLAIN, HRDLICKA, WHITE, WILLIAMS & AUGHTRY, Houston, TX.

OPINION

Page 100

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Royce C. Lamberth, United States District Judge.

Upon consideration of the plaintiffs' Motion for the Entry of a Monetary Judgment and to Set an Evidentiary Hearing on Plaintiffs' Request for Injunctive Relief [200], the defendant's Opposition [204] thereto, and the plaintiffs' Reply [205], the Court hereby DENIES the motion for injunctive relief and GRANTS the motion for a monetary judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

Prior opinions of this Court have detailed the complex procedural background of this litigation at length. See, e.g., Beck v. Test Masters Educ. Servs. Inc., Civil No. 1:04-CV-01391 (RCL), 2013 WL 6668699, at *1-2(D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2013). For present purposes, the Court will recount only those facts relevant to this opinion.

Plaintiffs--former students in the defendant's LSAT preparation course--filed suit in 2004, claiming violations of the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act (" CPPA" ). Plaintiffs enrolled in the defendant's course, offered as Test Masters Educational Services (" TES" ), believing that they were registering for a different course known as TestMasters, operated by Robin Singh Educational Services, Inc. When plaintiffs initially contacted the defendant via telephone and expressed interest in LSAT preparation courses, each referenced locations where Singh's TestMasters operated courses and TES did not. TES agents failed to correct the apparent misunderstanding, and in doing so, " affirmatively and impliedly mislead plaintiffs." Beck v. Test Masters Educ. Servs. Inc., No. 1:04-CV-01391 (RCL), 2013 WL 6668699, at *5 (D.D.C. Dec. 18, 2013). As such, this Court granted summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the CPPA claims. Id.

TES appealed. Because this Court's order granting summary judgment did not resolve the plaintiffs' claims for injunctive relief and statutory damages under the CPPA, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit dismissed the appeal, holding that the order was " not a final appealable order under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because it does not dispose of all claims against all parties." Beck v. Test Masters Educ. Servs. Inc., No. 14-7010., ECF No. 1492325 (May 9, 2014). Seeking resolution of these claims, the plaintiffs filed the instant motion.1 For the reasons outlined below, the Court denies the motion for injunctive relief and grants the motion for statutory damages.

II. MOTION FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION

A. Legal Standard

The CPPA provides that, as a remedy for proven...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP