On the heels of the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Bowerman—which held that questions concerning the “existence of damages” for each class member can prevent certification—the Eleventh Circuit became the latest in a growing number of courts to conclude that class certification should be denied when plaintiffs cannot prove that each individual class member actually suffered damages.

In Baker v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, 2022 WL 3452469, at *1 (11th Cir. Aug. 18, 2022), plaintiffs alleged that State Farm’s formula for assessing diminution in vehicle value systematically understated the true diminished value, thereby leading to underpayment of claims.  In support of class certification, plaintiffs submitted an expert sample of seventy-five individual claims where State Farm’s formula purportedly under-assessed the true diminished value.  Id. at *3.  On that basis, plaintiffs argued that State Farm’s liability could be established by common proof.

The Eleventh Circuit disagreed, affirming the district court’s conclusion that plaintiffs’ expert sample failed to demonstrate that State Farm’s formula always under-assessed diminished value across the broad spectrum of vehicles and types of damage included in the class.  Id. at *4.  Because “the central liability question” for each class member—i.e., whether State Farm’s formula resulted in under-assessment of a particular claim—required individualized proof, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that plaintiffs had failed to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)’s predominance requirement.  Id.

Baker emphasizes the continued importance of framing individualized damages issues as questions of fact of injury required to establish liability rather than damages per se.  Although courts have been reluctant to conclude that certification should be denied when the quantum of each class member’s damages requires individual proof, they have broadly concluded that certification should be denied when plaintiffs’ “common proof” is insufficient to demonstrate that the defendant is liable to each individual class member.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Steve Petkis Steve Petkis

Steve Petkis is a litigation associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. He has experience defending a variety of clients in their most sensitive and complex litigation matters in both state and federal court.

Steve is skilled in all phases of litigation, including…

Steve Petkis is a litigation associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. He has experience defending a variety of clients in their most sensitive and complex litigation matters in both state and federal court.

Steve is skilled in all phases of litigation, including discovery, trial, and appeal. In particular, he has played a lead role in crafting and executing dispositive, expert, and evidentiary briefing strategies, resulting in key victories at all stages. As a member of multiple trial teams, Steve also has stand-up court experience and has been responsible for taking and defending fact and expert depositions, drafting key witness examinations, and developing post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Steve previously served as a law clerk to Judge Katherine B. Forrest on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. He maintains an active pro bono practice focused on civil rights and criminal justice issues.

Photo of Andrew Soukup Andrew Soukup

Andrew Soukup has a wide-ranging complex litigation practice representing highly regulated businesses in class actions and other high-stakes disputes. He has built a successful record of defending clients from consumer protection claims asserted in class-action lawsuits and other multistate proceedings, many of which…

Andrew Soukup has a wide-ranging complex litigation practice representing highly regulated businesses in class actions and other high-stakes disputes. He has built a successful record of defending clients from consumer protection claims asserted in class-action lawsuits and other multistate proceedings, many of which were defeated through dispositive pre-trial motions.
Andrew is co-chair of the firm’s Class Action Litigation practice group.

Andrew has helped his clients achieve successful outcomes at all stages of litigation, including through trial and appeal. He has helped his clients prevail in litigation against putative class representatives, government agencies, and commercial entities. Representative victories include:

  • Delivered wins in multiple nationwide class actions on behalf of large financial companies related to fees, disclosures, and other banking practices, including the successful defense of numerous lenders accused of violating the Paycheck Protection Program’s implementing laws, which contributed to Covington’s recent recognition as a “Class Action Group Of The Year.”
  • Successfully defending several of the nation’s leading financial institutions in a wide variety of litigation and arbitration proceedings involving alleged violations of RICO, FCRA, TILA, TCPA, FCBA, ECOA, EFTA, FACTA, and state consumer protection and unfair and deceptive acts or practices statutes, as well as claims involving breach of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment, and other torts.
  • Successfully defended several of the nation’s leading companies and brands from claims that they deceptively marketed their products, including claims brought under state consumer protection and unfair deceptive acts or practices statutes.
  • Obtained favorable outcomes for numerous clients in commercial disputes raising contract, fraud, and other business tort claims.

Because many of Andrew’s clients are subject to extensive federal regulation and oversight, Andrew has significant experience successfully invoking federal preemption to defeat litigation.

Andrew also advises clients on their arbitration agreements. He has successfully helped numerous clients avoid multi-district class-action litigation by successfully enforcing the institutions’ arbitration agreements.

Clients praise Andrew for his personal attention to their matters, his responsiveness, and his creative strategies. Based on his “big wins in his class action practice,” Law360 named Mr. Soukup a “Class Action Rising Star.

Prior to practicing law, Andrew worked as a journalist.

Photo of Sonya Winner Sonya Winner

A litigator with three decades of experience, Sonya Winner handles high-stakes civil cases for clients in a wide range of industries, including banking, pharmaceuticals and professional sports. She has handled numerous antitrust and consumer disputes, many of them class actions, in state and…

A litigator with three decades of experience, Sonya Winner handles high-stakes civil cases for clients in a wide range of industries, including banking, pharmaceuticals and professional sports. She has handled numerous antitrust and consumer disputes, many of them class actions, in state and federal courts across the country.

Sonya’s cases typically involve difficult technical issues and/or complex legal and regulatory schemes. She is regularly able to resolve cases before the trial phase, often through dispositive motions. But when neither summary judgment nor a favorable settlement is an option, she has the confidence of her clients to take the case all the way through trial and on appeal. Her recent successes have included a cutting-edge decision rejecting a “true lender” challenge to National Bank Act preemption in a class action involving interest rates on student loans, as well as the outright dismissal of a putative antitrust claim against the National Football League and its member clubs asserting an unlawful conspiracy to fix cheerleader compensation.

Sonya has been recognized as a leading trial lawyer by publications like Chambers and the Daily Journal. She is chair of the firm’s Class Action Litigation Practice Group.