Glenn Gates v. Rohm & Haas Co

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the risk subsequent triers of fact will need to reexamine evidence and findings from resolution of the common issue(s)” counsels against certification of those common issues
• “A trial on whether the [issues proposed] is unlikely to substantially aid resolution of the substantial issues on liability and causation.”
• “Plaintiffs have neither defined the scope of the lia- bility-only trial nor proposed what common proof would be presented.”
• “Nor did the court err in finding no marked division between damages and liability.”
• “The trial court here did not abuse its dis- cretion by declining to certify a liability-only issue class when it found liability inseverable from other issues that would be left for follow-up proceedings.”
• “[I]t is well established that the class claims must be cohesive. . . . The disparate factual circumstances of class members may prevent a class from being cohesive and, therefore, make the class unable to be certified under Rule 23(b)(2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).