State v. Schaetzle

How courts have described this case

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

• noting, in Rule 10 23(b)(3) predominance analysis, that “a large portion of the proposed class was . . . never exposed 11 to the challenged policy,” where defendant estimated that 35.2 to 41.7 percent were not exposed
• “[T]he rule does not require a plaintiff seeking class 2 certification to prove that each element of their claim is susceptible to classwide proof, so long as 3 one or more common questions predominate.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).