Unpublished UCL/class certification decision
Today's Daily Journal has an article entitled "Panel Narrows Cipro Class Action," reporting on an unpublished Court of Appeal decision affirming (in large part) class certification of certain antitrust and related UCL claims:

The trial court here properly concluded that there are substantial issues of law and fact common to all of the proposed class members. Determining whether the Cipro Agreements violate the Cartwright Act (Bus. & Prof.Code, §  16720 et seq.), the Unfair Competition Act (Bus. & Prof.Code, §  17200 et seq.), or the common law requires the resolution of potentially complex issues that do not vary among the individual class members. The nature and circumstances of the Cipro Agreements--and their legality under California law--raise identical factual and legal issues as to every member of the class. For every single class member to litigate these common issues separately would impose a substantial burden on the courts and the litigants.

In re Cipro Cases I & II, No. D043543, 2004 WL 1627983, *4 (Jul. 21, 2004).  The discussion of how expert testimony works at the class certification stage is especially interesting.
- posted by Kim Kralowec @ 9:16 AM