47 Cited authorities

Shady Grove Orthopedic v. Allstate Ins. Co.
559 U.S. 393 (2010) Cited 1,153 times 44 Legal Analyses
Holding that rules of civil procedure allowing multiple claims to be litigated together "neither change plaintiffs' separate entitlements to relief nor abridge defendants' rights; they alter only how the claims are processed"
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts
472 U.S. 797 (1985) Cited 1,783 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that “the Due Process Clause of course requires that the named plaintiff at all times adequately represent the interests of the absent class members”
Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp.
527 U.S. 815 (1999) Cited 930 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a fairness hearing under Rule 23(e) is no substitute for rigorous adherence to those provisions of the Rule designed to protect absentees"
Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 3,047 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that " common nucleus of facts and potential legal remedies dominate[d]" over "idiosyncratic differences between state consumer protection laws" where a nationwide class of minivan buyers’ claims turned on "questions of [the manufacturer’s] prior knowledge of the [vehicle’s] deficiency, the design defect, and a damages remedy"
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez
436 U.S. 49 (1978) Cited 1,402 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that a tribe's sovereign immunity barred a suit against the tribe for declaratory and injunctive relief
Morton v. Mancari
417 U.S. 535 (1974) Cited 1,352 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to “single Indians out as a proper subject for separate legislation.”
Staton v. Boeing Co.
327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,920 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that "named plaintiffs ... are eligible for reasonable incentive payments" in addition to reimbursement "for their substantiated litigation expenses, and identifiable services rendered to the class directly under the supervision of class counsel"
United States v. Lara
541 U.S. 193 (2004) Cited 240 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that tribes may prosecute nonmember Indians as an exercise of their inherent tribal authority
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A., Inc.
396 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2005) Cited 755 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that decision to grant or reject objector's motion for discovery regarding fairness of settlement depended on "whether or not the District Court had before it sufficient facts intelligently to approve the settlement offer"
Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm'n
688 F.2d 615 (9th Cir. 1982) Cited 1,121 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding a settlement must stand or fall in its entirety because a district court cannot "delete, modify or substitute certain provisions"
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,840 times 1232 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"

Cobell, et al v. Salazar , et al

47 Cited authorities

Holding that rules of civil procedure allowing multiple claims to be litigated together "neither change plaintiffs' separate entitlements to relief nor abridge defendants' rights; they alter only how the claims are processed"

Holding that “the Due Process Clause of course requires that the named plaintiff at all times adequately represent the interests of the absent class members”

Holding that "a fairness hearing under Rule 23(e) is no substitute for rigorous adherence to those provisions of the Rule designed to protect absentees"

Holding that a tribe's sovereign immunity barred a suit against the tribe for declaratory and injunctive relief

Holding that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to “single Indians out as a proper subject for separate legislation.”

Holding that "named plaintiffs ... are eligible for reasonable incentive payments" in addition to reimbursement "for their substantiated litigation expenses, and identifiable services rendered to the class directly under the supervision of class counsel"

Holding that tribes may prosecute nonmember Indians as an exercise of their inherent tribal authority

Holding that decision to grant or reject objector's motion for discovery regarding fairness of settlement depended on "whether or not the District Court had before it sufficient facts intelligently to approve the settlement offer"

Holding a settlement must stand or fall in its entirety because a district court cannot "delete, modify or substitute certain provisions"

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"