In Wright et al. v. Honeywell International Inc., Vermont’s highest court has reversed and remanded a lower state court’s denial of class certification to a consumer collective action alleging Honeywell International Inc. abused its dominant position in the thermostat market. Vermont Supreme Court held that the trial court applied too rigorous a standard in denying the class certification by requiring the plaintiff’s expert to prove plaintiff’s case at the certification stage and by moving from fact of injury to amount of damages, which can be proven in class actions on an individual basis if necessary. The court further held that the lower court’s responsibility at this stage of the litigation was limited to determining whether plaintiff’s evidence would use generalized proof common to the class, thereby demonstrating that issues of law and fact common to the class would predominate.