context: (R. Doc. 580 at 28). Plaintiffs', however, attempt to reconcile these conflicting positions by arguing that although individual plaintiffs will ultimately seek monetary relief, such relief is not being sought on a class-wide basis and thus is incidental to the declaratory judgment and injunctive relief sought. (R. Doc. 580 at 30). However, given that the declaratory judgment and in-junctive relief sought will not provide relief to any member of the class -- whose claims include "physical pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress, disability, economic loss, and loss of life's pleasures" (R. Doc. 94) -- Plaintiffs' claims can only be redressed through individual damage awards, which are not available in a Rule 23(b)(2) class.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 131 S.Ct. 2557, 2557
citation_a.parenthetical: "[23(b)(2) ] does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary damages."
citation_a.sentence: See Dukes, 131 S.Ct. at 2557 (“[23(b)(2) ] does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary damages.”); see also Allison, 151 F.3d at 415 (“[Ijncidental damage should not require additional hearings to resolve the disparate merits of each individual’s case.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 151 F.3d 415, 415
citation_b.parenthetical: "[Ijncidental damage should not require additional hearings to resolve the disparate merits of each individual's case."
citation_b.sentence: See Dukes, 131 S.Ct. at 2557 (“[23(b)(2) ] does not authorize class certification when each class member would be entitled to an individualized award of monetary damages.”); see also Allison, 151 F.3d at 415 (“[Ijncidental damage should not require additional hearings to resolve the disparate merits of each individual’s case.”).