In Jimenez v. Allstate Insurance Co., 765 F.3d 1161 (9th Cir. 2014) (No. 12-56112), plaintiffs claimed that Allstate had a practice or unofficial policy requiring claims adjustors to work unpaid overtime.  The district court certified a class to decide whether class members worked overtime without compensation in violation of California law, whether defendants knew of the practice, and whether defendants permitted the practice.  The court held that these liability issues could be determined on a class-wide basis, based on statistical sampling of class members, leaving potentially difficult issues of individualized damages for later proceedings.  The Ninth Circuit affirmed.  It found the certification order proper because the common questions recognized by the district court will drive the answer to liability issues.  The court concluded that statistical sampling and representative testimony are acceptable ways to determine liability, so long as the defendant may raise any individual defenses it has at the damages phase of proceedings.  By not permitting representative testimony and sampling at the damages phase, and bifurcating proceedings, the Ninth Circuit concluded the district court had preserved Allstate’s rights to prevent individualized defenses while permitting class-wide determination of common questions.