What is a Motion to Modify/Amend Order Certifying Class?

Any party may file a motion to amend or modify an order certifying a class. (Cal. Rules of Court 3.764(a)(3); Vasquez v. Super. Ct. (1971) 4 Cal.3d 800, 821.)

“Where necessary, the trial court has some flexibility to allow amendments to class definitions that will allow an appropriate class action to be resolved on its merits.” (Kendall v. Scripps Health (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 553, 566.) The trial court “can and should redefine the class where the evidence before it shows such a redefined class would be ascertainable.” (Sotelo v. Medianews Group, Inc. (2012) 207 Cal.App.4th 639, 650-51 (citation omitted).)

A motion to amend or modify a class certification order must be filed and served on all parties to the action at least 28 calendar days before the date appointed for hearing. (Cal. Rules of Court 3.764(c)(1).) The documents in support of the motion shall consist of the notice of motion, a memorandum of points and authorities, and related evidence. (Cal. Rules of Court 3.764(c)(3).) Any evidence to be considered at the hearing on the motion must be by declaration or request for judicial notice. (Cal. Rules of Court 3.764(d).)

Useful Rulings on Motion to Modify/Amend Order Certifying Class

Recent Rulings on Motion to Modify/Amend Order Certifying Class

SILVIA HERNANDEZ V. WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

The Court retains discretion to modify the class definition following certification. (See Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 930, 947-948; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.764(e) [parties may modify the class certification order by stipulation approved by the Court].)

  • Hearing

    Sep 20, 2019

HARRY TRAN VS ST. GEORGE & ASSOCIATES

Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Modify Class Definition TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff’s motion to modify the class definition is granted as set forth herein. BACKGROUND: This is a class action involving a residential lease agreement. On June 24, 2013, plaintiff Harry Tran entered into a one-year written lease with defendant St. George & Associates for a residential unit located at 6518 Del Playa, Unit A, Isla Vista, California. Defendant owns several rental properties in Santa Barbara County.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2019

JANIS S MCLEAN ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Defendant then filed a motion to determine the sufficiency of class allegations and decertify the class or modify the class definition, which was denied on May 5, 2017 because there had not yet been any class discovery. Plaintiff filed her motion for class certification, which was set for hearing on February 1, 2019. The parties attended full-day mediation with Judge Hight (Ret.) on December 14, 2018.

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JANIS S MCLEAN ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Defendant then filed a motion to determine the sufficiency of class allegations and decertify the class or modify the class definition, which was denied on May 5, 2017 because there had not yet been any class discovery. Plaintiff filed her motion for class certification, which was set for hearing on February 1, 2019. The parties attended full-day mediation with Judge Hight (Ret.) on December 14, 2018.

  • Hearing

    May 24, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

JANIS S MCLEAN ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Defendant then filed a motion to determine the sufficiency of class allegations and decertify the class or modify the class definition, which was denied on May 5, 2017 because there had not yet been any class discovery. Plaintiff filed her motion for class certification, which was set for hearing on February 1, 2019. The parties attended full-day mediation with Judge Hight (Ret.) on December 14, 2018.

  • Hearing

    Mar 21, 2019

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

STEPHANIE CONTRERAS-LOPEZ V. SAN JOSE FOOTHILL FAMILY COMMUNITY, ET AL.

Absent any objection by the parties, the Court will modify the class definition to match the description in the class notice, which is more straightforward and less likely to omit individuals from the class. C. Community of Interest With respect to the first community of interest factor, “[i]n order to determine whether common questions of fact predominate the trial court must examine the issues framed by the pleadings and the law applicable to the causes of action alleged.” (Hicks v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2018

DENISE ADAME VS. APPLE INC

Although Apple also references Plaintiff's statement in Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points & Authorities in support of Plaintiff's motion to modify the class definition that "Apple has 'largely' (if not entirely) abandoned the practice of selling 'bundled' iPhones" such a reference is not evidence that Apple no longer sells bundled iPhones. The court finds Apple fails to meet its burden of establishing the absence of triable issues of material fact as to Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jun 01, 2017

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DENISE ADAME VS. APPLE INC

Although Apple also references Plaintiff's statement in Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points & Authorities in support of Plaintiff's motion to modify the class definition that "Apple has 'largely' (if not entirely) abandoned the practice of selling 'bundled' iPhones" such a reference is not evidence that Apple no longer sells bundled iPhones. The court finds Apple fails to meet its burden of establishing the absence of triable issues of material fact as to Plaintiff's claims for injunctive relief.

  • Hearing

    Jun 01, 2017

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ARMEN G KOJIKIAN ET AL VS AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO INC

The Court of Appeal in Clothesrigger reversed the trial court’s order denying the class representative’s motion to modify the class definition to include all long distance subscribers nationwide. The Court of Appeal held that the trial court based its decision on improper criteria, and erred in denying the motion without engaging in the proper constitutional and conflict of laws analysis with respect to the propriety of applying California law to the claims of the proposed nonresident plaintiffs.

  • Hearing

    Feb 02, 2017

PHILLIP LETZO ET AL VS DAVID ABRAHAM ET AL

The court will further modify the class definition to insert the limitations period. Otherwise the court adopts the tentative ruling issued for the August 9, 2013 hearing. Tentative Ruling: The court grants the motion of plaintiffs Philip Letzo, Hans Lingens, and Bonita Braaten for class certification. The court certifies the following classes: 1.

  • Hearing

    Aug 30, 2013

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ELIZABETH FLANAGAN VS WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Nature of Proceedings: Motion: Amend/Modify Order Certifying Class On April 4, 2012, the court certified a class consisting of “All individuals in the State of California who were enrolled in any Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., business checking debit rewards program from April 23, 2000, to the present, and charged a fee therefor, without agreement and authorization” with respect to plaintiffs’ claims for violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 et seq.

  • Hearing

    Aug 01, 2012

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

1

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.