What is the test for determining whether a plaintiff is a cognizable class for purposes of determining a representative jury?

Just as "persons with low incomes do not constitute a cognizable class" for purposes of determining a representative jury (People v. Johnson (1989) 47 Cal.3d 1194, 1214, 255 Cal.Rptr. 569, 767 P.2d 1047), so too they should not be treated as a discriminated group under the Act. Something more than mere inability to pay ought to be required before a cause of action is stated under the Act. In my view, mere discrimination in the sense of distinguishing between those who can afford to pay and those who cannot is not enough under the Act. But that is not the case here. Plaintiffs have alleged their ability to pay the going rent. Thus, the question comes down to [224 Cal.App.3d 388] whether the three-times-rent requirement is a reasonable or arbitrary one and that question cannot be resolved on demurrer from the face of the pleadings.

1 The two named plaintiffs sued both individually and on behalf of their children and other similarly situated persons.