§Why CasetextPricing

Marcia L. Caronia, Linda McAuley and Arlene Feldman, Appellants,v.Philip Morris USA, Inc., Respondent.

Brief

101 Cited authorities

  1. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes

    564 U.S. 338 (2011)   Cited 6,635 times   505 Legal Analyses
    Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”

  2. Kaufman v. Cohen

    307 A.D.2d 113 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 1,166 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that misrepresentations by one business partner to other partners about the value of a business interest was "essential" to completing the underlying misappropriation of a business opportunity

  3. Derdiarian v. Felix Contr Co.

    51 N.Y.2d 308 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 1,881 times
    Holding that the negligence of a driver did not negate a contractor's failure to safeguard an excavation site, and that "[b]ecause questions concerning what is foreseeable and what is normal may be the subject of varying inferences, as is the question of negligence itself, these issues generally are for the fact finder to resolve"

  4. Norfolk Western R. Co. v. Ayers

    538 U.S. 135 (2003)   Cited 211 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in a case brought under the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA), 45 U.S.C. §§ 51- 60, a plaintiff already suffering from asbestosis can recover emotional distress damages associated with fear of developing cancer, but a disease-free plaintiff merely exposed to asbestos cannot recover emotional distress damages

  5. Potter v. Firestone Tire &

    6 Cal.4th 965 (Cal. 1993)   Cited 850 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding outrageous conduct exceeds all bounds of that usually tolerated in a civilized community

  6. Kronos, Inc. v. AVX Corp.

    81 N.Y.2d 90 (N.Y. 1993)   Cited 722 times
    Holding that plaintiffs' cause of action sounding in tort accrued in 1988 when plaintiff suffered damages, even though breach occurred in 1984

  7. Barnes v. American Tobacco Company

    161 F.3d 127 (3d Cir. 1998)   Cited 557 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the decision of a district court to decertify a class should be reviewed for an abuse of discretion

  8. In re Paoli R.R. Yard PCB Litigation

    916 F.2d 829 (3d Cir. 1990)   Cited 626 times
    Holding exposure to be an element of claim for injuries from hazardous substance

  9. Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear Inc.

    50 N.Y.2d 507 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 851 times
    Holding that a commercial landlord has a duty to take reasonable precautionary measures to minimize the risk of foreseeable criminal activity and to make the premises safe for the visiting public

  10. Metro-North Commuter R. Co. v. Buckley

    521 U.S. 424 (1997)   Cited 150 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a separate tort cause of action is not available under FELA to recover lump-sum medical monitoring costs

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 111,339 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

  12. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 34,923 times   1234 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

  13. Section 51 - Liability of common carriers by railroad, in interstate or foreign commerce, for injuries to employees from negligence; employee defined

    45 U.S.C. § 51   Cited 7,569 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Denying recovery to an inferior class of beneficiaries [dependent siblings] where a preferred class [parents] exists

  14. Section 2-316 - Exclusion or Modification of Warranties

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 2-316   Cited 165 times
    Providing that remedies for a breach of warranty may be limited in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code

  15. Section 147.140 - Preservation of right to maintain existing coverage

    45 C.F.R. § 147.140   Cited 40 times
    Requiring grandfathered plans to provide virtually the same benefits for the same percentage cost sharing that the plan had in effect on March 2010

  16. Section 2590.715-1251 - Preservation of right to maintain existing coverage

    29 C.F.R. § 2590.715-1251   Cited 29 times

    (a)Definition of grandfathered health plan coverage - (1)In general - (i)Grandfathered health plan coverage means coverage provided by a group health plan, or a health insurance issuer, in which an individual was enrolled on March 23, 2010 (for as long as it maintains that status under the rules of this section). A group health plan or group health insurance coverage does not cease to be grandfathered health plan coverage merely because one or more (or even all) individuals enrolled on March 23,