Opinion ID: 832933
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The trial court's reliance on Neal v. James

Text: First, the circuit court clearly relied on the now-repudiated Neal standard in its opinion and order granting class certification, in which it cited Neal and stated: When evaluating a motion for class certification, the trial court is required to accept the allegations made in support of the request for certification as true. Henry explicitly rejected this approach. Id. at 505 n. 39, 772 N.W.2d 301 ([T]o the extent that Neal could be read to require a trial court to accept as true a plaintiffs bare assertion that a class certification prerequisite is met, we overrule Neal ) Further, the circuit court confirmed that it relied on the Neal standard when it denied defendant's motion for reconsideration, in which defendant challenged the court's reliance on Neal. Thus, the court clearly based its decision on this incorrect standard. For this reason alone, I would direct the court to revisit its analysis on remand in light of Henry.