Jack Jimenez v. Allstate Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “[pjroving at trial whether such informal or unofficial policies existed” would drive the resolution of class claims
• holding that Leyva was the “controlling case,” and that individual damages calculations did not defeat class certification
• holding that “cursory statements that the district court’s order also incorrectly applied Rule 23(b)(3)’s [predominance] requirement” are “not enough to preserve the issue for appeal”
• holding that where an issue is mentioned without legal argument, the issue is neither specifically nor distinctly argued and thus not subject to review
• holding that where an issue is mentioned without legal argument, the issue is neither specifically nor distinctly argued and thus not subject to review
• holding that the district court’s order bifurcating liability and damages “preserved both [the defendant’s] due process right to present individualized defenses to damages claims and the plaintiffs’ ability to pursue class certification on liability issues”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).