Legal Opinion

Cope v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 29, 1998No. 97-567PublishedCited by 66 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAlice Robie Resnick, J.

The issue presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying class certification on the basis that appellants failed to satisfy Civ.R. 23(B)(3)’s requirement of predominance and superiority.2 For the reasons that follow, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to give adequate consideration to whether the asserted claims are susceptible of class-wide proof, thereby obviating the need for separate adjudications.

Recently, the United States Supreme Court declared that “[predominance is a test readily met in certain cases alleging consumer or securities…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Vasquez v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Hamilton v. Ohio Savings BankOhio Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Ojalvo v. Board of TrusteesOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. 26 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1192, 26 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,040 Josef Eggleston and Albert Viera v. Chicago Journeymen Plumbers' Local Union No. 130, U. A., Defendants- Edell Plummer v. Chicago Journeymen Plumbers' Local Union No. 130, U. A., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1981

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

3Cited by66 opinions

  1. Morrow v. Reminger & Reminger Co.Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
  2. Sikes v. Teleline, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
  3. Baughman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOhio Supreme Court · 2000
  4. In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
  5. Kaldenbach v. Mutual of Omaha Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009

61 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