Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Section 1950

Citation
Section 1950
Parent Document
Granberry v. Islay Investments, 889 P.2d 970 (1995)
Jurisdiction
California (state)
Effective Date
1995-03-06

Other Sections in This Document (169)

Full Text

1,245 chars
Initially, the trial court failed to distinguish between the separate issues of the determination of the amount for which a defendant is liable to the plaintiff class and the method for distribution of that amount to the class. Code of Civil Procedure section 384, cited by the majority, makes clear the distinction between the amount of a defendant’s liability to the class and the method of distribution of the class recovery (including the disposition of any unpaid residual). It first requires that “prior to the entry of any judgment in *760a class action ... the court shall determine the total amount that will be payable to all class members . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 384, subd. (b), italics added.) Thereafter, “the parties shall report to the court the total amount that was actually paid to the class members. After the report is received, the court shall amend the judgment to direct the defendant to pay the sum of the unpaid residue ... in any manner the court determines is consistent with the objectives and purposes of the underlying cause of action . . . .” {Ibid.) Thus, the proper measure of the class recovery is the injury caused to the class members, not the amounts that individual class members step forward to claim.