William s dato party trial#

Mass Mutual contends plaintiffs' claims are not suitable for class treatment because Mass Mutual believes that each plaintiff will be required to make an individual showing of the representation he or she received. & Prof.Code, § 17200 et seq.) (UCL) and Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civ.Code, § 1750 et seq.) (CLRA). Plaintiffs believe Mass Mutual's failure to disclose to purchasers its own conclusions about its high discretionary dividend rate and its plans to lower the rate give rise to liability for violations of California's Unfair Competition Law (Bus. The plaintiffs believe they have evidence which shows Mass Mutual in fact developed plans to “ratchet down” its dividend over time. Plaintiffs contend that at the time they purchased policies Mass Mutual was paying a discretionary dividend rate which Mass Mutual had no intention of maintaining.

Mass Mutual offered its customers what it called an “N Pay” premium payment plan. In the insurance industry these products are generically referred to as “vanishing premium” policies. In theory and as suggested by Mass Mutual's agents in sales presentations, over time the principal amount of accumulated premiums would be large enough so that the amount of the discretionary dividend would pay the annual premium due on the policy. The product the plaintiffs purchased not only provided insurance coverage and a guaranteed return on accumulated premium, but also permitted plaintiffs to share in dividends which the company declared on a discretionary basis. We issued an order to show cause and have received a response from the plaintiffs and real parties in interest.

William s dato party trial#

Dato, San Diego, for Real Parties in Interest.īy way of its petition for extraordinary relief defendant Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (Mass Mutual) challenges the trial court's order certifying as a plaintiffs' class 33,000 people who, over a course of 15 years, purchased a particular type of life insurance product from Mass Mutual. Knutson Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach, L.L.P., John J. Williams McKenna & Cuneo, L.L.P., Robert S. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom L.L.P. Karges, Jr., et al., Real Parties in Interest. The SUPERIOR COURT of San Diego County, Respondent William A. MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Court of Appeal, Fourth District, Division 1, California.