United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO CERTIFY CLASS
EVANS BARKER, JUDGE
before the Court is the plaintiff's motion to certify
class. Dkt. 5. In this action, the plaintiff seeks
declaratory and injunctive relief related to the conditions
of the Henry County Jail (“the Jail”). He seeks
certification of the following class:
all persons currently confined, or who will in the future be
confined, in the Henry County Jail.
defendants have responded to the plaintiff's motion, dkt.
33, and the plaintiff has replied, dkt. 37. The motion for
class certification is therefore ripe for the Court's
Standard for Class Certification
class ‘may only be certified if the trial court is
satisfied, after a rigorous analysis, that the
prerequisites of Rule 23(a) have been satisfied.'”
CE Design Ltd. v. King Architectural Metals, Inc.,
637 F.3d 721, 723 (7th Cir. 2011) (quoting General
Telephone Co. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 161 (1982))
(emphasis added). Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
23(a), one or more members of a class may sue on behalf of
all members to the class only if:
(1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is
(2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class;
(3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are
typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and
(4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a). “The party seeking certification
bears the burden of demonstrating that certification is
proper by a preponderance of the evidence.” Bell v.
PNC Bank, Nat. Ass'n, 800 F.3d 360, 373 (7th Cir.
addition to meeting the requirements of Rule 23(a),
“the class must satisfy one of the four conditions in
Rule 23(b).” Id. Here, the plaintiff seeks
certification under Rule 23(b)(2), which allows for class
certification when “the party opposing the class has
acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to
the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding
declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a
whole.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(2).
defendants contest class certification only on the ground
that the named plaintiff, Adam Bell, does not satisfy the
requirement of Rule 23(a)(4). See dkt. 33 at 2.
Specifically, they contend that Mr. Bell will not adequately
and fairly protect the interests of the class because he is