Wage Law

A consumer class action certification order was reversed on appeal last month in Sony Electronics v. Superior Court (2006) ___ Cal.App.4th ___. The Fourth District Court of Appeal found that the trial court erred in defining the class as "[a]ll persons or entities [in the United States] who purchased Sony Vaio GRX [Series Notebook computers]"] in which the memory connector pins for either of the two memory slots were inadequately soldered" because an ascertainable class must be defined according to objective facts, not conclusions of liability:

the class definition requires a merits-based determination in order to establish whether a particular GRX Series Notebook owner is a member of the class. The members of such a class are thus not readily identifiable so as to permit appropriate notice to be given and the definition would not permit persons who receive notice of this action to determine whether they are part of the class.

The case was remanded with directions for further proceedings to determine whether an ascertainable class could be determined. Sony Electronics serves as a reminder that class definitions must always be defined according to objective, readily ascertainable criteria. You can download the full text of Sony Electronics from these links to the court's website in pdf or Word format.