Addie T. Coleman, on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated v. General Motors Acceptance Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that Rule 23(b)(2) classes do not require “notice and the opportunity to ‘opt out’ of the class action”
• noting that a court need not provide “individual members of [a (b)(2)] class with notice and the opportunity to ‘opt out’ of the class action” because “[Rule 23(b)(2)] [is] designed to permit only classes with homogenous interests”
• discussing cases in the federal district courts, one court of appeals case, and ECOA’s legislative history and concluding that “there is clear support for the use of a disparate impact theory in an ECOA case”
• “The additional requirements of notice and the opportunity to opt out are necessary in Rule 23(b)(3) classes precisely because claims for money damages involve individual interests that are necessarily heterogenous in nature.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).