Herman Conley, Kenneth Edwards, and James Tate, Sr.

Summary

The court held that when a party invokes Rule 52 in connection with a motion for class certification, the circuit court must make specific findings of fact and conclusions of law on all six Rule 23 factors, regardless of whether certification is granted or denied. The denial order was inadequate because it addressed only three factors, lacked specific factual findings, and failed to distinguish between the two proposed classes. The court therefore reversed and remanded without reaching the parties' arguments concerning commonality, typicality, or ascertainability.