Motion for Class Certification - Arizona

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF [________________________________]

Case No.: [________________________________]

MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT

(Assigned to the Hon. [________________________________])

MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION

Plaintiff [________________________________] ("Plaintiff"), individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, for an order:

1. Certifying this action as a class action under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and 23(b)(3) [and/or (b)(1) and/or (b)(2)];

2. Appointing Plaintiff [________________________________] as the Class Representative;

3. Appointing the undersigned, [________________________________], as Class Counsel under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(g);

4. Defining the Class and the claims and issues to be tried on a classwide basis as set forth below; and

5. Directing the parties to confer and submit a proposed form and plan of class notice under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2).

In support, Plaintiff submits the following Memorandum, the Declaration(s) of [________________________________], the exhibits filed herewith, the pleadings and papers on file, and any evidence and argument presented at the hearing on this Motion.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff requests certification of the following Class:

Class Definition: All persons in the State of Arizona who [________________________________] during the period from [__/__/____] through [__/__/____] (the "Class Period").

Excluded from the Class: Defendant, its officers, directors, employees, agents, affiliates, and legal representatives; the judicial officers assigned to this case and their staff and immediate families; and all persons who timely request exclusion.

Defendant engaged in a uniform course of conduct — [________________________________] — affecting every Class member in the same manner. The central liability questions can be resolved through common evidence, satisfying each requirement of Arizona Rule 23.

II. STATEMENT OF FACTS

A. Background

1. [________________________________]

2. [________________________________]

B. Defendant's Uniform Conduct

3. [________________________________]

4. [________________________________]

C. Plaintiff and the Class

5. Plaintiff [________________________________] is a member of the proposed Class. On or about [__/__/____], Plaintiff [________________________________]. See Declaration of [________________________________], ¶¶ [____].

6. Plaintiff was subjected to the same conduct, and suffered the same type of harm, as the absent Class members.

III. LEGAL STANDARD

Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 23, effective January 1, 2017, governs class actions and closely tracks the modern federal Rule 23. Arizona courts look to federal authority construing Rule 23 as persuasive. See Godbey v. Roosevelt School Dist. No. 66, 131 Ariz. 13, 638 P.2d 235 (Ct. App. 1981); London v. Green Acres Trust, 159 Ariz. 136, 765 P.2d 538 (Ct. App. 1988).

The proponent must satisfy the four prerequisites of Rule 23(a) — numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy — and at least one subdivision of Rule 23(b). For a damages class under Rule 23(b)(3), the proponent must also show that common questions predominate over individual questions and that a class action is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently adjudicating the controversy. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). An order certifying a class must define the class and the class claims, issues, or defenses; appoint class counsel under Rule 23(g); set forth the court's reasons for maintaining the case as a class action; and describe the evidence supporting that determination. Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1)(B).

IV. ARGUMENT

A. Numerosity — Rule 23(a)(1)

The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. Plaintiff is informed and believes the Class consists of at least [________________________________] members throughout Arizona, identifiable from Defendant's records. See [Declaration / Defendant's records].

B. Commonality — Rule 23(a)(2)

There are questions of law or fact common to the Class, including:

☐ Whether Defendant engaged in [________________________________];

☐ Whether Defendant's conduct was unlawful under [________________________________] (e.g., the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act, A.R.S. § 44-1521 et seq.; breach of contract/warranty; or common law);

☐ Whether Defendant's conduct caused classwide harm; and

☐ [________________________________].

C. Typicality — Rule 23(a)(3)

Plaintiff's claims are typical of the Class because they arise from the same course of conduct and rest on the same legal theories. Specifically:

☐ Plaintiff experienced the same conduct as the Class;

☐ Plaintiff's claims arise from the same events and legal theories; and

☐ [________________________________].

D. Adequacy of Representation — Rule 23(a)(4) and 23(g)

Plaintiff and counsel will fairly and adequately protect the Class.

The Class Representative is adequate because:

☐ Plaintiff has no conflict with the Class;

☐ Plaintiff has a genuine interest in the outcome and will prosecute the case vigorously; and

☐ [________________________________]. See Declaration of [________________________________], ¶¶ [____].

Proposed Class Counsel is adequate under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(g) because:

☐ Counsel has identified and investigated the claims;

☐ Counsel is experienced in class action and complex litigation and has prosecuted similar actions;

☐ Counsel is knowledgeable of the applicable law; and

☐ Counsel will commit the resources necessary to represent the Class. See Declaration of [________________________________], Exhibit [____].

E. The Class Satisfies Rule 23(b)(3): Predominance and Superiority

1. Predominance

Common questions predominate over individual questions. The central liability issue — [________________________________] — turns on Defendant's uniform conduct and can be proven with common evidence, including [________________________________]. The need for individualized damages determinations does not defeat predominance where liability is established on a classwide basis.

2. Superiority

A class action is superior to other available methods. The pertinent factors under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3)(A)-(D) favor certification:

☐ (A) Class members have little interest in individually controlling separate actions, given the modest individual recoveries;

☐ (B) Plaintiff is not aware of other litigation already begun by or against Class members concerning this controversy [or: describe];

☐ (C) It is desirable to concentrate the litigation in this forum because [________________________________]; and

☐ (D) The action is manageable, as Defendant's records permit efficient notice and the common questions can be tried with common proof.

F. Alternative: Certification Under Rule 23(b)(1) and/or (b)(2)

☐ Rule 23(b)(1): Separate actions would risk inconsistent adjudications establishing incompatible standards of conduct, or would dispose of or impair the interests of absent members.

☐ Rule 23(b)(2): Defendant acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the Class, making final injunctive or declaratory relief appropriate for the Class as a whole.

G. The Class Is Adequately Defined and Identifiable

The Class is defined by objective criteria and members are identifiable from Defendant's records, including [________________________________].

V. PROPOSED TRIAL PLAN AND CLASS NOTICE

A. Trial Plan

Plaintiff proposes to prove the Class's claims as follows:

☐ Liability (common phase): classwide trial of the predominating common question(s): [________________________________], using [Defendant's records / documentary evidence / expert testimony];

☐ Relief: [classwide / formulaic damages / claims process], with any individualized issues addressed through [________________________________].

B. Class Notice

Upon certification, Plaintiff will submit a proposed notice and plan under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2) providing the best notice practicable, including the plain-language content required by Rule 23(c)(2)(B), which may be delivered by:

☐ Direct mail and/or email notice to members identifiable from Defendant's records;

☐ Publication notice in [________________________________]; and

☐ [________________________________].

VI. CONCLUSION

For these reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion and enter an order certifying the Class, appointing Plaintiff as Class Representative and the undersigned as Class Counsel under Rule 23(g), defining the Class claims and issues, setting forth the court's supporting reasons and evidence as required by Rule 23(c)(1)(B), and directing the parties to submit a proposed class notice.

DATED: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class

By: [________________________________]
[Attorney Name], Esq. (Ariz. Bar No. [________])
[Firm Name]
[Address]
[City, State ZIP]
Telephone: [________________________________]
Email: [________________________________]

EXHIBITS / SUPPORTING PAPERS

☐ Declaration of [________________________________] (Proposed Class Representative)
☐ Declaration of [________________________________] (Proposed Class Counsel — Rule 23(g))
☐ Declaration of [________________________________] (Expert, if any)
☐ Proposed Class Notice and Notice Plan
☐ [Proposed] Order Granting Class Certification (with Rule 23(c)(1)(B) findings)
☐ [________________________________]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on [__/__/____], I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT to be served upon all counsel of record via:

☐ AZTurboCourt / electronic filing system
☐ First-Class U.S. Mail
☐ Email
☐ Hand Delivery

Served upon:

[________________________________]
[________________________________]
[________________________________]

[________________________________]
Signature

Arizona Practice Notes

• Governing rule. Arizona class actions are governed by Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23. The current Rule 23 was adopted September 2, 2016, effective January 1, 2017 (and amended thereafter), and closely tracks the modern federal Rule 23, including the Rule 23(g) class-counsel standard and the Rule 23(c)(2)(B) plain-language notice content.
• Federal authority is persuasive. Because Arizona Rule 23 mirrors the federal rule, Arizona courts look to federal decisions construing Rule 23 as persuasive. Godbey v. Roosevelt School Dist. No. 66, 131 Ariz. 13, 638 P.2d 235 (Ct. App. 1981); London v. Green Acres Trust, 159 Ariz. 136, 765 P.2d 538 (Ct. App. 1988). Verify whether more recent Arizona appellate authority has construed the post-2017 rule for your issue.
• Certification order content. Unlike the federal rule, Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1)(B) expressly requires the certifying order to "set forth the court's reasons for maintaining the case as a class action" and "describe the evidence supporting the court's determination." Submit a proposed order that satisfies these requirements.
• Interlocutory appeal — as of right. Under Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(f), "[t]he court's order certifying or denying class action status is appealable in the same manner as a final order or judgment." During the pendency of an appeal under A.R.S. § 12-1873, all discovery and other proceedings are stayed, although the court may, on motion, permit discovery to continue. This differs from the federal discretionary Rule 23(f) procedure — Arizona treats the certification order as appealable like a final judgment.
• Consumer-protection nuance. Class claims commonly arise under the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), A.R.S. § 44-1521 et seq. Note that the CFA generally requires a showing of reliance/injury; address whether reliance can be established on a classwide basis (e.g., through a uniform, material misrepresentation) when briefing predominance.
• Unsettled / flag. Because the modern rule is relatively recent, the depth of Arizona appellate gloss on post-2017 predominance, ascertainability, and Rule 23(g) is still developing; flag reliance on federal authority and confirm the current Rule 23(f) / A.R.S. § 12-1873 appellate procedure before relying on it.

Sources and References

• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23 (adopted Sept. 2, 2016, eff. Jan. 1, 2017; as amended)
• Ariz. R. Civ. P. 23(f); A.R.S. § 12-1873 (appeal of certification orders; stay)
• Godbey v. Roosevelt School Dist. No. 66, 131 Ariz. 13, 638 P.2d 235 (Ct. App. 1981)
• London v. Green Acres Trust, 159 Ariz. 136, 765 P.2d 538 (Ct. App. 1988)
• A.R.S. § 44-1521 et seq. (Arizona Consumer Fraud Act)

This template is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Arizona Rule 23 (eff. Jan. 1, 2017) tracks the modern federal Rule 23, and a certification order is appealable as a final order under Rule 23(f) and A.R.S. § 12-1873. Consult experienced Arizona class action counsel before filing.