Opinion ID: 2205488
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Adequacy of Representation Requirement Has Been Met

Text: ¶ 38 The two factors that must be considered in determining whether the class representatives will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class members are (1) whether the [representatives] have interests antagonistic to those of the class and (2) the class attorney's qualifications, experience, and ability to conduct the litigation. Id. The first prong ensures that [a] class representative must be part of the class and possess the same interest and suffer the same injury as the class members. Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 625-26, 117 S.Ct. 2231, 138 L.Ed.2d 689 (1997) (internal quotation marks omitted). The representative's understanding of the lawsuit or the representative's character is given little weight in determining whether they are an adequate representative. Ditty, 182 F.R.D. at 642. This is because class representatives are generally laypeople and they are not expected to prosecute their own action or that of the class. 1 Conte & Newberg, supra § 3:24. For this reason, the second prong focuses on the qualifications of the representative's counsel. See Ditty, 182 F.R.D. at 642-43 (finding attorney to be adequate for class representation where he had represented plaintiff classes on several occasions, shown an ability to advance the costs of the litigation on behalf of his client, and had shown adequate legal abilities); see also Amchem, 521 U.S. at 626 n. 20, 117 S.Ct. 2231. ¶ 39 The district court determined that the class representatives did not have interests antagonistic to those of the classes. This determination was made despite evidence that some class representatives did not fully understand what it meant to be a class representative, some neglected to list the class claim as the reason they are upset, some did not complain about being charged for the products, and some did not know what doc fees were. ¶ 40 While it appears that some of the class representatives may not have a full understanding of their lawsuit, both the representatives and the class members have an interest in adjudicating the questions certified to the class. There is no evidence in the record suggesting that in prosecuting these questions in their own claim, the representatives will not meet the interests of the class members as well. Therefore, it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to find that the representatives did not have interests antagonistic to those of the class. ¶ 41 Because the Car Dealers concede that the representatives' attorneys are qualified, experienced, and able to conduct this litigation, we do not need to address that issue.