Archives: Class Definition

The Ascertainability Requirement Claims Another Class. A Growing Trend?

A new case, Hernandez v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., No. CV 12-5543 DSF JCX, 2013 WL 6332002 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2013), highlights challenges plaintiffs face in certifying classes where membership in the class is difficult or impossible to ascertain based on the defendant’s records. In Hernandez, the plaintiff sought to certify a class of … Continue Reading

California Rejects a Class that Includes Uninjured Class Members

By Julian Perlman on October 31, 2013 Posted in Class Action Trends, Class Certification, Class Definition, Settlements

A California federal court has rejected a proposed settlement to a class action over alleged material omissions in Option Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan documentation (Order Denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Settlement Approval in Peel, et al. v. BrooksAmerica Mortgage Corp., et al.). Lead plaintiffs and defendants, which included several divisions of Washington Mutual, agreed to … Continue Reading

Stammco, L.L.C. v. United Tel. Co. of Ohio, Addressing Rule 23 Requirements for Class Certification in Ohio

By John Lewis on July 21, 2013 Posted in Class Certification, Class Definition, Ohio

Editors’ Note: This article was originally posted on Baker’s Employment Class Action blog. After eight years and two visits, the Ohio Supreme Court has issued an opinion that not only addresses key developments in federal class action jurisprudence, but also decided the underlying class certification question. The resulting opinion will have a major impact on Ohio … Continue Reading

Wal-Mart Sex Discrimination Plaintiffs Get a Second Bite at a Smaller Apple

By Casie Collignon on September 27, 2012 Posted in Class Action Trends, Class Certification, Class Definition, Equitable Relief, Rule 23 Requirements, Rule 23(b)(2) Class Actions

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled in Wal-Mart Stores Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), that five named plaintiffs alleging nationwide sex discrimination class action claims did not satisfy Rule 23(a)’s commonality requirement and could not bring class claims for monetary relief under Rule 23(b)(2). In October of last year, the plaintiffs filed a … Continue Reading