The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the district court’s decision declining to certify a proposed damages class in an auto insurance diversity action in Washington involving Liberty Mutual.
This case centers on how auto insurance companies value totaled vehicles.
Plaintiffs sued Liberty Mutual, an auto insurer, and CCC Intelligent Solutions, a company that Liberty works with to help it develop its valuations.
Plaintiffs alleged that Liberty breached its contracts with its insureds and that both companies violated Washington’s unfair trade practices law and committed civil conspiracy.
A district court declined to certify a proposed class because individual questions predominated over common questions and individualized trials were superior to a class action.
The 9th Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the predominance and superiority requirements for certifying a class action were not satisfied.
To show liability for breach of contract or unfair trade practices, plaintiffs must show an injury, the court held.
Plaintiffs Leeana Lara and Cameron Lundquist sued both Liberty Mutual, an auto insurer, and CCC Intelligent Solutions, a company that Liberty works with to help it develop its valuations. Plaintiffs allege that Liberty breached its contracts with its insureds and that both companies violated Washington’s unfair trade practices law and committed civil conspiracy.
The plaintiff’s vehicles were totaled, and Liberty valued them in part with a disputed downward condition adjustment. The plaintiffs then sued Liberty and CCC, arguing that they didn’t follow Washington insurance regulations, which require the insurers to itemize the deductions or additions that they make, and that these adjustments be appropriate.
