[Cite as Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Agrawal,

.]

Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA

JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 96413

FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT

vs.

SUDESH AGRAWAL DEFENDANT-APPELLEE

JUDGMENT: REVERSED AND REMANDED

Civil Appeal from the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas Case No. CV-536588

BEFORE: Celebrezze, P.J., Jones, J., and E.A. Gallagher, J.

RELEASED AND JOURNALIZED: March 13, 2014 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT Irene C. Keyse-Walker Tucker Ellis, L.L.P. 950 Main Avenue Suite 1100 Cleveland, Ohio 44113-7213 Brett K. Bacon Gregory R. Farkas Colleen C. Murnane Frantz Ward, L.L.P. 127 Public Square 25th Floor Cleveland, Ohio 44114-1999 Thomas M. Byrne Stacey M. Mohr Valerie S. Sanders Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, L.L.P. 999 Peachtree Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3996 Loren L. Alikhan Jonathan Hacker O’Melveny & Myers, L.L.P. 1625 Eye Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20008

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE Anand N. Misra The Misra Law Firm, L.L.C. 3659 Green Road Suite 100 Beachwood, Ohio 44122 Robert S. Belovich 9100 South Hills Boulevard Suite 300 Broadview Heights, Ohio 44147 FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., P.J.:

{¶1} This cause is before us on remand from the Ohio Supreme Court for further

review of our decision released December 15, 2011.1

{¶2} On review of appellant Ford Motor Credit Company’s proposition of law that

[c]laims for breach of contract, fraud, and nondisclosure involving a standardized contract cannot be certified as a class action when individualized inquiries are necessary to determine (a) whether each claimant’s contract was actually violated or misrepresented, and (b) whether each claimant suffered economic harm as a result,

the Ohio Supreme Court reversed our decision based on their recent holding in Cullen v.

State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co.,

,

,

.

{¶3} We therefore reverse the judgment of the trial court granting class

certification and remand this cause to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance

with the holding in Cullen.

{¶4} Judgment reversed and remanded.

It is ordered that appellant recover of said appellee costs herein taxed.

The court finds there were reasonable grounds for this appeal.

It is ordered that a special mandate be sent to said court to carry this judgment into

execution.

A certified copy of this entry shall constitute the mandate pursuant to Rule 27 of

the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Sudesh Agrawal, 8th Dist. Cuyahoga No. 96413,

. 1 FRANK D. CELEBREZZE, JR., PRESIDING JUDGE

LARRY A. JONES, SR., J., and EILEEN A. GALLAGHER, J., CONCUR