Legal Opinion
Hendershot v. Ready to Roll Transportation, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 14, 2014No. B247730PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, J.
The plaintiffs Daniel Hendershot et al. 1 appeal the trial court’s order denying their motion for class certification. The trial court found that the proposed class was not sufficiently numerous because a majority of the putative class members had entered into releases and arbitration agreements with the defendant Ready to Roll Transportation, Inc.
We find that the order must be reversed on the following grounds: (1) the court’s analysis of the “numerosity” factor was incorrect; (2) the court improperly considered the merits of defendant’s affirmative defenses; and (3) the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- General Telephone Co. of the Northwest, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Brinker Restaurant Corp. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
- Linder v. Thrifty Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 2000
- William Harris v. Palm Springs Alpine Estates, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1964
- Paxton v. Union National BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In re Franchise Tax Bd. Ltd. Liab. Corp. Tax Refund Cases, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Assn. for L.A. Deputy Sheriffs v. County of L.A.California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Cardamon v. Dominion Courtyard Villas CA5California Court of Appeal · 2020
- Franchise Tax Bd. Limited Liability Corp. Tax Refund CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2018
- Jimenez-Sanchez v. Dark Horse Express, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.