Webb v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that typicality is satisfied where plaintiff's \injuries arise from the same events or course of conduct as do the injuries of the class and when plaintiff's claims and those of the class are based on the same legal theory\
• noting that typicality is satisfied where plaintiff’s “injuries arise from the same events or course of conduct as do the injuries of the class and when plaintiff’s claims and those of the class are based on the same legal theory”
• adopting analytical approach taken in a Southern District of New York case which required a plaintiff to present admissible evidence for class certification
• whether plaintiffs in analyst cases must make showing of market impact at class certification is an “open question”
• “The mere fact that a putative class representative . . . is subject to a unique defense does not render her atypical for the purposes of 23(a) unless that defense threatens to become to focus of litigation thereby prejudicing absent class members.”
• “The mere fact that a putative class representative . . . is subject to a unique defense does not render her atypical for the purposes of 23(a) unless that defense threatens to become to focus of litigation thereby prejudicing absent class members.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).