2

If a Motion for Class Certification is denied by the court, does the case continue?

I'm trying to research litigation against a specific US company and I've come across some cases in which the court has recently dismissed Motions for Class Certification. However, being unfamiliar with US law, I am unsure if these cases are still awaiting final decisions with respect to the plaintiff alone despite the denial of class certification.

1
  • Of course, usually the whole reason for bringing a class action case in the first place is that the harm suffered by each individual plaintiff is very small (say, a few dollars) and not worth suing over by itself. So if class certification is denied, even if the plaintiff could proceed as an individual, it's probably not worth the expense, and they would most likely drop or settle the case immediately. Sep 27, 2021 at 14:01

1 Answer 1

2

If a Motion for Class Certification is denied by the court, does the case continue?

YES Unless there is some other reason why not.

CLASS CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES ARE GOVERNED BY Rule 23(c)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 23): “At an early practicable time after a person sues or is sued as a class representative, the court must determine by order whether to certify the action as a class action.” If the court denies certification, the action will proceed as an individual action. The court should not consider the impact of denying class certification in making its ruling [2]

[...]

Ruling on Certification

If the court denies certification, the action will proceed as an individual action. The court should not consider the impact of denying class certification in making its ruling.[29]

Source, and my emphasis.

Footnotes [2] and [29] refer to Kovaleff v. Piano, 142 F.R.D. 406, 408 (S.D.N.Y.)1992 and both comment that:

... whether denial of class certification would result in the putative class never obtaining relief is irrelevant to whether the named plaintiffs meet the requirements of Rule 23.

A relevant extract from the cited case, at 408, is:

While the Court was initially concerned about the fact that denial of class action status here might well foreclose the possibility of any action being brought on behalf of the class, see Korwek v. Hunt, 827 F.2d 874 (2d Cir.1987), the Court is now convinced that that circumstance is irrelevant to whether these plaintiffs meet the requirements of Rule 23.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.