A State Farm customer who argued he and other customers should have received checks for full windshield replacement rather than be given repairs had his class action certification upheld by the Eighth District Court of Appeals in the County of Cuyahoga, Ohio, with slight modification, according to court documents.

Michael Cullen, who is the class representative, claims he reported windshield damage to State Farm in 2003 and that his claim was handled by the company’s subcontractor Lynx Services, as described in court documents. After talking with this agent, Cullen agreed to a repair instead of replacement, but later brought suit against State Farm arguing he should have received a check in full for the replacement value of his windshield, minus the deductible.

In the case, Cullen v. State Farm, filed in 2005, Cullen’s attorneys alleged State Farm created a script that Lynx used to steer claimants to opt into windshield repair rather than replacement. Cullen claimed the Lynx agent did not volunteer all options, and in particular, did not share a “pay-out” option where claimants could get a check for the entire amount of the windshield, minus the deductible, and then repair or replace the windshield at their own expense.

Cullen alleged breach of contract, bad faith and breach of fiduciary duty against State Farm. He sought monetary and declaratory relief as well as class certification for others similarly situated.

After the trial court decided that Cullen met all the requirements of class certification, State Farm appealed.

Writing the appellate court’s prevailing opinion, Judge Frank Celebrezze Jr., says, “For claims handled using a common script or word track, the trial court did not err in certifying the class in this case. Individual questions do not predominate because the script used by Lynx and developed by State Farm establishes class-wide treatment under Cullen’s theory that State Farm breached its contracts with insureds by dissuading individuals from replacing their windshields and not informing them of their option to receive a check for the value of the windshield less their deductible.

“For claims made prior to the use of a common script, Cullen argues that the policy language simplifies the case to a showing that the policy in question required State Farm to restore vehicles to their pre-loss condition and that a windshield repair cannot do so. The theory, while dubious, does provide a means to resolve the case on a class-wide basis for these members. Therefore, the trial court did not err in certifying this class. However, the class definition must be restricted to exclude those who had their windshields replaced after repair. Finally, State Farm has provided nothing to indicate that the trial court did not fulfill its duty to analyze the issues in the case when rendering its judgment,” the judge says.

“Class action lawsuits are different than a typical lawsuit in that it is two lawsuits in one,” explains NWRA president Rich Campfield. “The first issue/lawsuit before any of the merits of a case or any factual findings of the case are determined is the Certification of the Class. Certification of the Class is a lawsuit in and of itself. This one has taken eight years and the only issue that has been determined and ruled upon is that the class was certified because the consumers were all read the same script. The way a class is certified is they all have to have the same something  happen to them or all have the same damage in common. After Certification of the Class, the case then proceeds as a run-of-the-mill civil lawsuit over the law, facts and merits of the case. You can see how long it takes for a class action to go from start to finish and that is a big problem with the U.S. court system.”