Reese

Introduction

Plaintiff Gerald Reese appeals from an order denying his motion for class certification in his action against defendants Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and George Bronk, an employee at the Wal-Mart store located on Watt Avenue in Sacramento. Plaintiff argues that the trial court utilized improper legal criteria in denying his motion for class certification. We disagree and shall affirm.

In an appeal from a decision denying class certification, a reviewing court will “not disturb a trial court ruling on class certification which is supported by substantial evidence unless (1) improper criteria were used [citation]; or (2) erroneous legal assumptions were made [citation].” (Richmond v. Dart Industries, Inc. (1981) 29 Cal.3d 462, 470 [ 174 Cal.Rptr. 515 , 629 P.2d 23 ] (Richmond).) In other words, we will not substitute our judgment for that of the trial court as long as the trial court applied correct legal principles and assumptions, and did not abuse its discretion in arriving at its decision. (Occidental Land, Inc. v. Superior Court (1976) 18 Cal.3d 355, 361 [ 134 Cal.Rptr. 388 , 556 P.2d 750 ].)

In this case, the trial court did use the proper legal standard:…