The Tenth Circuit recently affirmed an order denying class certification, in an unpublished decision holding that district courts may rely on out-of-circuit precedent in deciding whether a proposed class is ascertainable.

In Evans v. Brigham Young University, No. 22-4050, 2023 WL 3262012 (10th Cir. May 5, 2023), the plaintiff alleged that he had paid tuition to attend in-person classes and that BYU was unjustly enriched when it switched to online-only education in March 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The plaintiff sought to represent a class of “All persons who paid tuition and/or the Mandatory Fees to attend in-person class(es) during the Winter 2020 term/semester affected by COVID-19 at BYU and had their class(es) moved to online only learning.” The district court held that the proposed class definition was not ascertainable under the standards adopted by the Third and Seventh Circuits for two reasons. First, the court held that it would need to identify all of the third-party sources that paid tuition on behalf of students, and that BYU lacked records showing the sources of payment. Second, the court held that it would need to inquire into the subjective state of mind for each student to determine whether they “paid tuition for the purpose of attending in-person classes, pandemic or not.”

The Tenth Circuit affirmed, noting that under Tenth Circuit law, ascertainability is treated “as a sub-requirement of numerosity.” The court explained that it has not explicitly adopted the ascertainability tests used by the Third and Seventh Circuits, but that district courts are allowed to consider those standards “as part of their discretion” in deciding class certification. But the court once again declined to adopt either approach as binding in the Tenth Circuit. Parties opposing class certification in the Tenth Circuit should keep their eye on ascertainability as a potential method for defeating certification. In the appropriate case, parties may consider arguing explicitly in favor of the more-stringent Third Circuit standard (to the extent that court has not softened its view).

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Isaac Chaput Isaac Chaput

Isaac Chaput handles complex commercial litigation, class actions, and mass torts.

Isaac represents clients across a range of industries with a particular focus on technology and life sciences. Their practice encompasses privacy, product liability, trademark, trade secret, antitrust, breach of contract, and other…

Isaac Chaput handles complex commercial litigation, class actions, and mass torts.

Isaac represents clients across a range of industries with a particular focus on technology and life sciences. Their practice encompasses privacy, product liability, trademark, trade secret, antitrust, breach of contract, and other commercial matters. Isaac has significant first-chair experience, having examined witnesses at trial, taken dozens of depositions, and argued numerous trial court motions and appeals. Clients value Isaac’s creative, practical, and business-focused advice throughout the litigation lifecycle. They also frequently provide pre-litigation advice to clients facing potential commercial disputes, helping their clients obtain favorable resolutions while avoiding litigation. Isaac maintains an active pro bono practice, including representing transgender and non-binary individuals in civil rights cases.

Isaac is a co-chair of Covington’s LGBTQ+ affinity group and deeply involved in the firm’s efforts to recruit and mentor diverse attorneys, including LGBTQ+ attorneys.

Watch: Isaac and members of the Class Actions practice discuss trends in technology industry class actions, as part of our Navigating Class Actions video series.