Patricia A. Daffin, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Ford Motor 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 a class of 23 members was substantial enough to meet the numerosity requirement
• holding that whether the throttle body was defective is a common question to all class members when all the vehicles had the same throttle body and warranty
• holding that commonality was satisfied when interpretation of a warranty contract was at issue
• noting that “[t]he mere fact that Daffin’s throttle assembly stuck, while other class members’ throttles have not stuck, does not render Daffin atypical”
• observing that allegedly defectively designed throttle body in named plaintiff's vehicle was identical to that found in all vehicles covered by the class definition
• stating that while “there is no strict numerical test,” a class in the thousands is sufficiently numerous

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).