Ninth Circuit Holds That Plaintiffs Are Not Required to Support Class Certification Motions by Admissible Evidence
Nurses Sali and Spriggs moved to certify seven classes of registered nurses allegedly underpaid by Corona Regional Medical Center (“Corona”) as a result of its employment policies and practices. The district court denied class certification for all of the proposed classes on multiple grounds including some of the classes failed to meet Federal Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement, none of the classes satisfied Rule 23(a)’s typicality requirement, Spriggs was not an adequate class representative because not a member of any of the proposed classes, and the attorneys were inadequate because they “had not demonstrated they [would] adequately serve as class counsel.” After Sali and Spriggs appealed, they moved to stay the appeal while the California courts ruled on some state law substantive issues. After the state courts ruled, Sali and Spriggs limited their appeal to four of the seven original classes. The 9th Circuit reversed and remanded for further proceedings.