pain and suffering, mental anguish and humiliation because “[assessing damages for these inherently individual injuries compels an inquiry into each class member’s individual circumstances”). Finally, certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is inappropriate because it is clear that the declaratory relief sought by Plaintiff is equivalent to a request for a declaration of liability. Powers v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 192 F.R.D. 313, 318 (S.D.Fla.1998). When “[t]he declaratory judgment count serves the ultimate goal of monetary damages and is designed primarily to facilitate and ensure the satisfaction of monetary relief,” class certification pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) is not appropriate. Id. See also In re Jackson National Life Ins. Co. Premium Litig., 183 F.R.D. 217 (W.D.Mich.1998) (<HOLDING>); Goldberg v. Winston & Morrone, No. 95 Civ.
holding because the district court refused to grant plaintiff reinstatement or any other injunctive relief the damage award was neither incidental to nor intertwined with any other relief holding that a request for injunctive relief was merely incidental to a prayer for damages where it was designed to facilitate and ensure the satisfaction of any monetary relief the court might award holding prayer for general relief does not support award of attorneys fees holding that a court may award injunctive relief against a state officer holding prayer for general relief does not support award of commonlaw prejudgment interest as element of damages