## Facts

- A concert was held at the Oakland Coliseum on March 31, 1973, with Neil Young as the featured performer.
- A ticket purchaser, Richard Kass, alleged Young ended the concert early by walking off stage and not returning, so patrons did not receive a full performance.
- Kass claimed to sue for himself and about 14,000 patrons, seeking approximately $98,000 for ticket costs and related expenses.
- Ticket purchasers’ contract was with the promoter (Bill Graham); Kass pleaded a tort theory against Young for interference with that contract.
- Young was personally served but did not respond; default was entered.
- At the default prove-up, Kass and counsel offered limited proof of classwide damages, proposing $91,000 by multiplying 14,000 attendees by a median ticket price, without evidence of ticket-price distribution.
- The resulting judgment awarded $91,000 to be shared among class members who could satisfy plaintiff’s counsel of class membership, with unclaimed funds to be later disposed of by the court; the judgment provided no class notice mechanism.

## Issues

1. Whether a defendant’s default in an action pleaded as a class action can support a binding class judgment without class certification and notice to absent class members.
2. Whether a default judgment awarding classwide monetary relief, using an informal claims process controlled by plaintiff’s counsel and lacking notice provisions, satisfies California class action requirements.
3. Whether the trial court properly vacated the default and judgment as to the class while leaving the default in place as to the named plaintiff’s individual claim, subject to proof of individual damages.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order.
- The court upheld vacatur of the default judgment to the extent it purported to be a class judgment.
- The court upheld vacatur of Young’s default to the extent it related to class claims.
- The court allowed Young’s default to remain in effect as to Kass’s individual claim, with Kass required to prove his individual damages.

## Legal Principles

- Pleading a class action and obtaining a defendant’s default do not eliminate the court’s obligation to determine whether class treatment is proper and to ensure procedures that protect absent class members.
- A judgment cannot operate as a binding class judgment without required class action safeguards, including a judicial determination of class status and a procedure for notice where necessary to protect absent members.
- Classwide monetary relief requires an adequate, court-supervised mechanism for identifying class members, administering claims, and distributing any recovery; counsel-controlled participation standards are insufficient.
- Courts may sever class and individual consequences of a default by vacating classwide relief while preserving default against the named plaintiff, subject to proof of the named plaintiff’s damages.

## Conclusion

The court held that a defendant’s default in a putative class action does not justify a classwide damages judgment absent class certification and procedures protecting absent members, particularly notice and court-controlled administration; however, the default could remain effective as to the named plaintiff’s individual claim, with damages to be proved individually.


Kass v. Young, 67 Cal. App. 3d 100, 136 Cal. Rptr. 469 (Ct. App. 1977)