Ahmad v. Old Republic National Title Insurance
690 F.3d 698
5th Cir.2012Background
- Interlocutory appeal from district court’s grant of class certification in a RESPA/state-law title-insurance case against Old Republic over R-8 reissue discounts.
- R-8 requires a discount on a new lender title policy if the refinanced loan is insured under a prior policy within seven years, with a sliding-scale credit (40% to 15%).
- Ahmads allege Old Republic routinely fails to grant the discount; district court granted summary judgment on the RESPA claim and certified a class for remaining state-law claims, narrowed to those with proxy indicators.
- District court relied on Benavides to find predominance; Old Republic sought review on whether class certification was proper given common questions would predominate.
- This court reverses the class certification, holds Benavides controls, and remands for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do common questions predominate under Rule 23(b)(3)? | Ahmads claim common questions exist due to uniform R-8 application. | Old Republic argues Benavides shows predominance is lacking. | No; predominance not shown; reversal and remand. |
| Is Benavides controlling precedent on predominance here? | Argues distinguishable facts justify class-wide resolution. | Benavides controls; no class-wide proof of common questions. | Benavides controls; case is not predicated on common questions. |
| Are the identified common questions actually capable of class-wide determination? | Question 3 and similar items can be resolved by common proof. | Questions require individualized, file-by-file review. | Not capable of class-wide determination; individual inquiries predominate. |
| Did district court err in treating certain proxy indicators as evidence of eligibility for the R-8 discount? | Proxy indicators suffice to show entitlement. | Proxy indicators are insufficient without individualized evidence. | Error; cannot rely on proxy indicators to establish class-wide liability. |
Key Cases Cited
- Benavides v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., 636 F.3d 699 (5th Cir. 2011) (predominance not satisfied when issues require individualized inquiries)
- Benavides v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., 636 F.3d 699 (5th Cir. 2011) (class certification reversed for lack of common questions capable of class-wide determination)
- Hancock v. Chicago Title Ins. Co., 263 F.R.D. 383 (N.D. Tex. 2009) (district court acknowledged lack of common questions; affirmed by Benavides)
- Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997) (framework for Rule 23 class certification; predominance requirement)
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011) (common questions must predominate for Rule 23(b)(3))
- Katrina Canal Breaches Litig. v. Bd. of Comm’rs, 628 F.3d 185 (5th Cir. 2010) (high-court guidance on evaluating commonality and predominance)
- Regents of the Univ. of Cal. v. Credit Suisse First Boston, 482 F.3d 372 (5th Cir. 2007) (factors for evaluating class-certification issues)