Iskanian v. CSL Transportation Los Angeles, LLC
59 Cal.4th 348 (Cal. 2014) Cited 724 times 145 Legal AnalysesHolding that arbitration provisions banning class-action litigation or collective arbitration of employment-related claims are enforceable under the NLRA and the FAA's saving clause, but also holding that arbitration provisions banning representative claims under California's Private Attorneys General Act violates that Act
Sav-On Drug Stores, Inc. v. Superior Court
34 Cal.4th 319 (Cal. 2004) Cited 519 times 10 Legal AnalysesHolding that common questions predominated in overtime case brought by chain store managers
Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.
23 Cal.4th 429 (Cal. 2000) Cited 536 times 1 Legal AnalysesReversing and remanding for reconsideration because the court was not "prepared to say that class treatment necessarily is proper," and "upon a fresh look [the trial court] may discern valid reasons for denying" the certification motion
Williams v. Superior Court
3 Cal.5th 531 (Cal. 2017) Cited 238 times 12 Legal AnalysesConcluding fear of retaliation cuts in favor of "facilitating collective actions so that individual employees need not run the risk of individual suits"
O'Connor v. Uber Techs., Inc.
201 F. Supp. 3d 1110 (N.D. Cal. 2016) Cited 172 times 1 Legal AnalysesFinding that this factor did not favor approval because "the non-monetary relief is of limited benefit to the class"
Wershba v. Apple Computer, Inc.
91 Cal.App.4th 224 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) Cited 228 timesFinding that application of California law to a class settlement was appropriate when "substantial numbers of class members are located in California"
Hicks v. Kaufman & Broad Home Corp.
89 Cal.App.4th 908 (Cal. Ct. App. 2001) Cited 170 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that “proof of breach of warranty does not require proof the product has malfunctioned but only that it contains an inherent defect which is substantially certain to result in malfunction during the useful life of the product”
Haralson v. U.S. Aviation Servs. Corp.
383 F. Supp. 3d 959 (N.D. Cal. 2019) Cited 96 timesFollowing O'Connor
Hernandez v. Restoration Hardware, Inc.
4 Cal.5th 260 (Cal. 2018) Cited 85 times 3 Legal AnalysesIn Hernandez the California Supreme Court held that unnamed class members who have not intervened may not appeal under California Code of Civil Procedure § 902.
Cohen v. DirecTV Inc.
178 Cal.App.4th 966 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 90 times 1 Legal AnalysesFinding that "common issue of fact do not predominate over the proposed class because the class would include subscribers who never saw DIRECTV advertisements or representations of any kind before deciding to purchase the company's HD services"
Section 382 - Party not consenting to joinder as plaintiff made defendant
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 382 Cited 920 times 6 Legal AnalysesSetting forth the requirements for class action certification
Rule 3.769 - Settlement of class actions
Cal. R. 3.769 Cited 69 times(a) Court approval after hearing A settlement or compromise of an entire class action, or of a cause of action in a class action, or as to a party, requires the approval of the court after hearing. (b) Attorney's fees Any agreement, express or implied, that has been entered into with respect to the payment of attorney's fees or the submission of an application for the approval of attorney's fees must be set forth in full in any application for approval of the dismissal or settlement of an action
Rule 3.766 - Notice to class members
Cal. R. 3.766 Cited 30 times(a) Party to provide notice If the class is certified, the court may require either party to notify the class of the action in the manner specified by the court. (b) Statement regarding class notice The class proponent must submit a statement regarding class notice and a proposed notice to class members. The statement must include the following items: (1) Whether notice is necessary; (2) Whether class members may exclude themselves from the action; (3) The time and manner in which notice should be