42 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,675 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”
Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor
521 U.S. 591 (1997) Cited 6,983 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval
United States Parole Comm'n v. Geraghty
445 U.S. 388 (1980) Cited 2,018 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding even a named plaintiff whose individual claims are moot retains a "personal stake" in representing the class jurisdictionally sufficient to appeal the denial of class certification
Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 3,066 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"
Staton v. Boeing Co.
327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,936 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"
Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
657 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 1,129 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs' commonality must connect to their claim for class relief
Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co.
666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 971 times 51 Legal Analyses
Holding that false advertising "class must be defined in such a way as to include only members who were exposed to advertising that is alleged to be materially misleading"
Cooper v. Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond
467 U.S. 867 (1984) Cited 574 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that members of a class of black employees of a Federal Reserve Bank could maintain separate actions against the bank under Title VII
Valentino v. Carter-Wallace, Inc.
97 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 707 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court abused its discretion by certifying the class in part because the plaintiffs made "no showing . . . of how the class trial could be conducted"
Wolin v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC
617 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 449 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a putative class action satisfied predominance because the allegations were susceptible to proof by generalized evidence
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 35,111 times 1237 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"
Section 4617 - Authority over critically undercapitalized regulated entities
12 U.S.C. § 4617 Cited 667 times 4 Legal Analyses
Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”
Section 116.3116 - Liens against units for assessments
Nev. Rev. Stat. § 116.3116 Cited 692 times
Granting superpriority to the portion of the HOA's lien comprised of "any charges incurred by the association on a unit pursuant to NRS 116.310312"
Section 4511 - Establishment of the Federal Housing Finance Agency
12 U.S.C. § 4511 Cited 173 times
Establishing FHFA as "an independent agency of the Federal Government"
Section 1825 - Issuance of notes, debentures, bonds, and other obligations; exemptions
12 U.S.C. § 1825 Cited 141 times 1 Legal Analyses
Stating that "[n]o property of the Corporation [i.e. FDIC] shall be subject to levy, attachment, garnishment, foreclosure or sale without the consent of the Corporation, nor shall any involuntary lien attach to the property of the Corporation"

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation et al v. SFR Investments Pool 1, LLC et al

42 Cited authorities

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”

Holding that courts are "bound to enforce" Rule 23's certification requirements, even where it means decertifying a class after they had reached a settlement agreement and submitted it to the court for approval

Holding even a named plaintiff whose individual claims are moot retains a "personal stake" in representing the class jurisdictionally sufficient to appeal the denial of class certification

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 plaintiffs' commonality must connect to their claim for class relief

Holding that false advertising "class must be defined in such a way as to include only members who were exposed to advertising that is alleged to be materially misleading"

Holding that members of a class of black employees of a Federal Reserve Bank could maintain separate actions against the bank under Title VII

Holding that the district court abused its discretion by certifying the class in part because the plaintiffs made "no showing . . . of how the class trial could be conducted"

Holding that a putative class action satisfied predominance because the allegations were susceptible to proof by generalized evidence

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"

Granting the FHFA the power to “operate” Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and “to conduct all [of their] business”

Granting superpriority to the portion of the HOA's lien comprised of "any charges incurred by the association on a unit pursuant to NRS 116.310312"

Establishing FHFA as "an independent agency of the Federal Government"

Stating that "[n]o property of the Corporation [i.e. FDIC] shall be subject to levy, attachment, garnishment, foreclosure or sale without the consent of the Corporation, nor shall any involuntary lien attach to the property of the Corporation"