How Do Class Action Lawsuits Work? | California Class Action Guide

‍

Class action lawsuits allow large groups of people to join together in a single lawsuit against a defendant when the individuals share a common harm. In California, such actions are governed under Code of Civil Procedure section 382 and mirror the requirements established in federal law. The key elements that enable a class to be certified in state court include numerosity, commonality or a community of interest, typicality, and the superiority of a class procedure over individual litigation. 

One important requirement is numerosity, which means the class must be so large that bringing all individual claims separately is impracticable. California courts have held that no specific number automatically satisfies numerosity, but classes of 30-40 members have commonly met the requirement. Another requirement, typicality, mandates that the claims of the class representative are similar to those of the other class members. 

‍

When Class Actions Are Appropriate

In consumer or product defect cases, class actions can work well because all members generally suffer the same or nearly identical injury such as a defective razor blade or a washing machine that fails. In such instances, the same legal theory applies, the facts are largely identical, and the damages are substantially similar to all the impacted Plaintiffs. This makes class treatment efficient and appropriate under California law. 

For example, in a consumer class action involving a defective product, all purchasers may receive a defined payout from a settlement fund without extensive individualized proof. The streamlined mechanism offers cost-effective resolution for both plaintiffs and defendants when the injuries are consistent.

‍

Why Class Actions Often Fail to Serve Victims in Unique Harm Cases

By contrast, in the case involving patients of Cedars‑Sinai Medical Center OB/GYN Dr. Barry J. Brock, each woman’s experience and injury differ significantly. Some endured multiple alleged incidents of misconduct, others a single encounter; emotional trauma, physical impact, and personal history vary widely. When harm is individualized rather than uniform across the Plaintiff population, the typicality and commonality requirements become much harder to satisfy, which undermines the idea that a class action will get full justice for each person.  

Moreover, the use of a class action in such circumstances can lead to unfair outcomes. Some members of the class may receive compensation even though they were not significantly harmed, while those who suffered deep trauma may receive a smaller payout than they deserve. 

The result in two gynecology abuse class action cases are instructive. As reported in the LA Times, in both the USC case involving Dr. Tyndall, and the UCLA case involving Dr. James Heaps, women with similar injuries received significantly different outcomes.  In both the USC and UCLA class actions, the average settlement for those in the class action was in the tens of thousands of dollars; those with private lawyers had settlements that averaged $1.2 million dollars per person. 

Meanwhile, defendants benefit by capping their exposure and limiting individual liability. Victims seeking justice may fare better through separate proceedings where damage is calculated based on their specific facts.

‍

Why Victims Should Consider Individual or Mass Tort Representation

When claims involve unique injuries, trauma or unique harm, individual lawsuits or mass torts offer the possibility of greater tailored compensation. In a mass tort, a large number of plaintiffs still join together, but each claim remains individualized—facts, evidence and damages are considered on a person-by-person basis. This distinctive mechanism allows for greater fairness where injuries differ rather than being uniform across a class.

The law firm McGrath Kavinoky LLP believes that individuals in the impacted in the Cedars-Sinai/Brock matter should talk to a lawyer to be able to make an informed decision about whether their case belongs in a class or demands an individual or mass tort lawsuit. Victims may find superior outcomes when their claim is treated separately, especially in sexual abuse cases, where every person’s experience can vary dramatically.

Class actions serve an important role in California litigation when many people suffer identical harm from a defendant’s conduct. But when victims’ stories vary and injuries are unique, the class action path may blur the true value of each claim and favor defendants. In those situations, individual representation or mass tort litigation offers a more fitting and more just solution. Victims of Dr. Barry J. Brock and Cedars-Sinai matter should assess whether class certification suits their experience—and whether they may secure more meaningful compensation outside the class framework.

‍