No. 5-99-0830 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ... - Appellate.net

Litig., 182 F.R.D. at 225.
Basic fairness requires that State Farm have a right to defend its conduct based on
the facts and circumstances of each transaction. A class action is a fair and efficient way of
adjudicating the controversy if all of the transactions are essentially identical because, in that
situation, plaintiffs are put to their proof with respect to all members of the class and the
defendant will have a full and fair opportunity to present all of its defenses. But in a case like
this, where the relevant facts of the millions of individual transactions at issue vary greatly,
trying the case as a class action inevitably minimizes the plaintiffs’ burden of proof and
deprives the defendant of the right to present its best defense. Such a result is not “fair.” On
the contrary, it is so clearly unfair that it constitutes a deprivation of the defendant’s basic
right to due process under the Illinois and the United States Constitutions.
D. The Circuit Court Erred In Concluding That The Class Representatives
Fairly And Adequately Represented The Class.
The Illinois class action statute also requires a proper determination that the named
plaintiffs will “fairly and adequately protect the interest of the class.” 735 ILCS 5/2-801(3).
This provision requires, among other things, that there be no significant conflicts between
the named class representatives and the class members, or among the class members
themselves. See Miner, 87 Ill.2d at 14; see also Magro, 67 Ill.2d at 161 (“The general rule
is that a class action cannot be maintained unless all members of the class have a common
interest in the questions involved and the results of the suit.”). Similarly, the federal due
process clause requires that the class be free from significant conflicts of interest. Hansberry
v. Lee, 311 U.S. 32, 44-45 (1940).
In its class certification order, the circuit court held that there were no conflicts of
-69-