Jimenez v. Allstate Insurance Co.

A court correctly grants class certification if the “common questions contain[] the ‘glue’ necessary to say that ‘examination of all the class members’ claims for relief will produce a common answer to the crucial question[s]’ raised by the plaintiffs’ complaint.”

Jack Jimenez and 800 California Allstate Insurance (“Allstate”) employees sued Allstate alleging “that Allstate has a practice or unofficial policy of requiring its claims adjusters to work unpaid off-the-clock overtime in violation of California law.” On appeal, Allstate argued: (1) that the district court’s order “does not comply with Rule 23 because the common questions it identified will not resolve class-wide liability”; and, (2) “the district court’s approval of statistical modeling violates Allstate’s due process rights.” The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of class certification to Jimenez and the Allstate employees. The panel held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in applying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(2)’s commonality requirement, because the “three common questions contained the ‘glue’ necessary to say that ‘examination of all the class members’ claims for relief will produce a common answer to the crucial question[s]’ raised by the plaintiffs’ complaint.” The panel also held that the class certification did not violate Allstate’s due process rights because the district court preserved Allstate’s due process right to raise any individualized defense it may have at the damage phase of the proceedings. AFFIRMED.