Supreme Court of California

In determining whether to certify a class action where putative class members have contractually agreed to application of another state-s law, the plaintiff has the burden of proof in showing a question of a common or general interest.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/25/2001
• Published 01/25/2001

Judges

• BAXTER, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  Stroock & Stroock & Lavan, Julia B. Strickland, Lisa M. Simonetti, Los Angeles, and Andrew W. Moritz, for Petitioner., O'Melveny & Myers, Martin S. Checov, Brian P. Brooks, Canton, MA, John H. Beisner and William H. Satchell for the Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., American Bankers Association, California Chamber of Commerce, California Bankers Association and Chamber of Commerce of the United States as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner., Severson & Werson, Jan T. Chilton, Mark Joseph Kenney, Michael J. Steiner and William L. Stern, San Francisco, for Mortgage Bankers Association of America, California Mortgage Bankers Association, American Financial Services Association and California Financial Services Association as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner., Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, Gail E. Lees, Los Angeles, Kevin R. Nowicki, Irvine, and Thomas D. Bunton for ITT Residential Capital Corporation, ITT Residential Capital Servicing Corporation and ITT Bowest as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner., Blumenthal Ostroff & Markham, Norman B. Blumenthal, David R. Markham, Sheldon A. Ostroff, Barron E. Ramos, San Diego;  Chavez & Gertler and Mark A. Chavez, San Francisco, for Real Party in Interest., Kirby McInerney & Squire, Alice McInerney, New York, NY, Jill M. Manning;  Law Office of Jeffrey F. Keller, Jeffrey F. Keller, San Francisco;  Law Office of Patrick O. Patterson, Patrick O. Patterson and Gretchen E. Miller, Milwaukee, WI, for Roger Babcock et al., as Amici Curiae on behalf of Real Party in Interest.


• For Appellees:
  
• No appearance for Respondent.