Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor

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

Eisen v. Carlisle Jacquelin

Holding that individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions

Mullane v. Central Hanover Tr. Co.

Holding that due process requires a hearing "appropriate to the nature of the case"

Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

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.

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"

Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc.

Holding that under rational basis review, "[i]t is not a function of the courts to speculate as to whether the statute is unwise or whether the evils sought to be remedied could better have been regulated in some other manner"

Hanon v. Dataproducts Corp.

Holding that the defendants' statements emphasizing superior quality were material because "a reasonable jury could conclude that [the company] publicly released optimistic statements ... when it knew [its product] could not be built reliably"

Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp.

Holding state law governing underlying claims in a diversity action “also governs the award of fees”

Valentino v. Carter-Wallace, Inc.

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"

Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm'n

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

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"

Rule 2 - One Form of Action

Providing for "one form of action to be known as 'civil action,'" in lieu of discretely labeled actions at law and suits in equity

Section 632 - Unlawful eavesdropping or recording

Providing for "imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year"

Section 9.73.030 - Intercepting, recording, or divulging private communication-Consent required-Exceptions

Prohibiting recording of private conversations

Section 637.2 - Action against person who committed violation; injunctive relief

Providing for damages of the greater of $5,000 per violation or three times the plaintiff's actual damages

Section 9.73.060 - Violating right of privacy-Civil action-Liability for damages

Section 10-402 - Interception of communications generally; divulging contents of communications; violations of subtitle

Authorizing judges to issue ex parte orders to intercept wire communications

Section 200.620 - Interception and attempted interception of wire communication prohibited; exceptions

Section 10-410 - Civil liability; defense to civil or criminal action

Section 200.690 - Penalties

Enforcing NRS 200.650 exclusively with criminal prosecution and civil damages