Plaintiff Thomas Paciorkowski, who is an attorney, purchased three electric bikes manufactured by defendant Jetson Electric Bikes, LLC (Jetson). He sued defendant, contending that Jetson made misrepresentations and engaged in several unconscionable commercial practices in advertising and marketing its electronic bikes. The complaint asserted individual claims and sought to certify a class action.
Plaintiff appeals from an order denying his motion to certify a class and dismissing his claims for lack of standing. The trial court reasoned plaintiff did not have standing to bring any of his claims because he had not suffered a personal injury from using the Jetson electric bikes.
The court holds plaintiff cannot represent the proposed class while he is also serving as the proposed representative plaintiff. Those dual roles involve inherent conflicts of interest, which the New Jersey Supreme Court identified over forty years ago. SeeIn re Cadillac V8-6-4 Class Action, 93 N.J. 412, 439-40 (1983). Plaintiff argued that the rule set forth in In re Cadillac should no longer be followed. The court rejects that position. Accordingly, the court affirms the portion of the order that denied certifying a class action.
Concerning plaintiff's individual claims, the court determines plaintiff has alleged damages and ascertainable losses, despite not suffering personal injuries. Thus, he had standing to bring his individual claims. Accordingly, the court reverses the order to the extent it dismissed plaintiff's individual claims. On remand, plaintiff can only pursue his individual claims.