Opinion ID: 2175343
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Opposing Arguments.

Text: This lawsuit attempts to aggregate approximately 5,000 separate damage claims. Defendant argues that the amount and basic right of recovery under each claim must be individually determined. A class action is, therefore, not proper, according to defendant, because the common or general interest requirement of sec. 260.12, Stats., is not satisfied, and no judicial economy would be achieved. Plaintiffs argue, on the other hand, that class actions seeking separate damage recoveries are proper under sec. 260.12, Stats., where the common issues decisively predominate over the separate issues. In this case, plaintiffs assert, the issue of defendant's liability is identical under each class member's claim, and the only noncommon issuethe amount of damagesmay be easily ascertained by reference to records and documents in defendant's possession. Plaintiffs argue that therefore Peters v. International Harvester Co., [28] where this court authorized a class action aggregating separate damage claims, is squarely on point here, and controlling.