Chiang v. Veneman

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “defining a class by reference to those who ‘believe’ they were discriminated against undermines the validity of the class by introducing a subjective criterion into what should be an objective evaluation”
• establishing that to assert an ECOA claim Plaintiff must show membership in a protected class
• modifying the class definition to eliminate a subjective criterion which “undermine[d] the validity of the class” because class membership must be ascertainable by reference to objective criteria
• substantive allegations of the complaint are taken as true for purposes of deciding the class certification motion
• substantive allegations of the complaint are taken as true for purposes of deciding the class certification motion
• rather than decertifying a class, choosing the \less drastic course\ of \simply modify[ing] the class definition\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).