On January 17, 2017, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania vacated a trial court’s order denying class certification of two classes of lessors to oil and gas leases covering property in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania in Cardinale v. R.E. Gas Dev., 2017 PA Super 13
. The case involved two classes of plaintiffs because two similar class action complaints were consolidated. These cases involved whether the lessees were required to tender paid-up bonuses when the lessee untimely rejected an oil and gas lease based upon title, surface or geology within a specified due diligence period. The trial court previously rejected the class certification that would have combined these two classes because common questions of law or fact did not predominate over individual questions with respect to the breach of contract claim, stating “[t]o fully resolve the case, the finder of fact would have to analyze each individual property and the circumstances surrounding the Defendants’ refusal to pay the bonus to determine if the Defendants breached each contract, or if the Defendants simply did not approve of the surface, title or geology of each parcel of land.”
On appeal, the Superior Court indicated that the critical inquiry for the certifying court is whether the material facts and issues of law are substantially the same for all class members. The court further provided that the existence of distinguishing individual acts is not fatal to class certification and that it is Pennsylvania’s policy to favor certification of class actions. Because the court identified six fundamental questions that are common to all class members, it found that the trial court erroneously denied class certification. Accordingly, the court vacated the trial court’s order and remanded so that the trial court may utilize its discretion and determine whether class certification is proper in this case, including whether the class definition is overly broad insofar as it may include individuals whose leases were rejected in a timely fashion.