Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Moeller v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 22, 2011No. 84500-0Published

1ConcurrenceAlexander, J.

¶57 (concurring in dissent) — I agree with the dissent written by Chief Justice Madsen. I write simply to express my view that the trial court committed an additional error in granting class action certification.

¶58 Farmers Insurance Company of Washington and Farmers Insurance Exchange (collectively Farmers) contend that the trial court erred in certifying the class because David Moeller, representing the class, failed to satisfy CR 23(b)(3). I agree. Under that rule, class certification may be maintained only if the court “finds that the questions of law or fact common to the members of the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Lacey Nursing Center, Inc. v. Department of RevenueWashington Supreme Court · 1995
  3. DeFunis v. OdegaardWashington Supreme Court · 1974
  4. Sitton v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2003
  5. Sitton v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2003

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API