Cruz v. Unilock Chicago, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that even if one of the named plaintiffs was not an adequate representative, this did not destroy the adequacy of the remaining named plaintiffs
• reversing denial of class certification and directing trial court to certify a class for claim under IMWL
• when analyzing question of class certification court assumes merits of plaintiffs claim and inquires only whether claim itself satisfies requirements for certification
• a supervisor who did not participate in the contested practice of requiring employees to report to their workstations before the start of their shift was an adequate class representative
• the trial court's discretion is limited to an inquiry into whether the plaintiffs are asserting a claim which, assuming its merits, will satisfy the requirements of section 2-801 as distinguished from an inquiry into the merits of the plaintiffs' particular individual claims
• the trial court’s discretion is limited to an inquiry into whether the plaintiffs are asserting a claim which, assuming its merits, will satisfy the requirements of section 2 — 801 as distinguished from an inquiry into the merits of the plaintiffs’ particular individual claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).