Caudle v. NorthBay Healthcare Group CA1/2
In a putative class action against defendant NorthBay Healthcare Group (NorthBay), plaintiff Joseph Caudle (Caudle) moved for certification of a class of uninsured patients who received medical treatment at a hospital owned by defendant NorthBay, were billed NorthBay’s “chargemaster” rates for their treatment, and did not receive any reductions to their bill or have payments made by a third party. The trial court denied certification, finding Caudle had not demonstrated that the class was ascertainable and that common issues predominated over individual issues. Caudle appeals, contending the trial court erred in requiring ascertainability and predominance because his putative class was a Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 23(b)(1) and/or (b)(2) (Rule 23) “equivalent” class, neither of which requires ascertainability or predominance. Alternatively, he argues he established both ascertainability and predominance. We conclude the trial court properly required ascertainab
Comments on Caudle v. NorthBay Healthcare Group CA1/2