|
p0681 In an action against an auto manufacturer on behalf of purchasers of certain cars who alleged that the seat belt buckles with which the cars were equipped were subject to accidental release because of a defect in the way they were designed, class certification was properly denied in the face of evidence that the location, shielding, and installation of the buckle, which varied among the cars involved, all affect whether it was subject to accidental release, thus requiring consideration of too many individual issues; in making class certification decisions, there is no requirement that conflicting evidence or inferences be disregarded in favor of plaintiff.CitationQUACCHIA v DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORP (Defective Buckles) 122 CA4 1442 [See: CCP 382; B&PC 17200 etseq; CivC 1750 etseq; Linder v Thrifty 23 C4 429, T/AT 8/00]
|
|
