22 Cited authorities

Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor
521 U.S. 591 (1997) Cited 6,946 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
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A. Inc.
280 F.3d 124 (2d Cir. 2001) Cited 674 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that refusal to certify a class "on the sole ground that it would be unmanageable is disfavored and ‘should be the exception rather than the rule’ " (quoting In re S. Cent. States Bakery Prods. Antitrust Litig. , 86 F.R.D. 407, 423 (M.D. La. 1980) )
Wolin v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC
617 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 447 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a putative class action satisfied predominance because the allegations were susceptible to proof by generalized evidence
Blackie v. Barrack
524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975) Cited 1,135 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the need to determine individualized damages does not defeat class certification
Beattie v. Centurytel
511 F.3d 554 (6th Cir. 2007) Cited 306 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that possible recovery of roughly $124.68 per class member was too small to encourage individuals to bring suit, thereby making a class action a superior method of adjudicating the dispute
In re Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.
288 F.3d 1012 (7th Cir. 2002) Cited 342 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that individual issues within state subclasses would render class action impracticable, even if litigated state-by-state
Walters v. Reno
145 F.3d 1032 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 298 times
Holding that giving "confusing" and "affirmatively misleading" forms to immigrants charged with document fraud deprived the recipients of their due process rights
Olden v. LaFarge Corp.
383 F.3d 495 (6th Cir. 2004) Cited 205 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "individual damage determinations" did not defeat class typicality
Lerwill v. Inflight Motion Pictures, Inc.
582 F.2d 507 (9th Cir. 1978) Cited 305 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that two employees had standing to sue to recover overtime pay as provided under a collective bargaining agreement
In re Potash Antitrust Litigation
159 F.R.D. 682 (D. Minn. 1995) Cited 159 times
Holding that small purchasers of potash could adequately represent the interests of large purchasers in the class
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,889 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"

Gamble v. Land Rover North America Inc

22 Cited authorities

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 that refusal to certify a class "on the sole ground that it would be unmanageable is disfavored and ‘should be the exception rather than the rule’ " (quoting In re S. Cent. States Bakery Prods. Antitrust Litig. , 86 F.R.D. 407, 423 (M.D. La. 1980) )

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

Holding that the need to determine individualized damages does not defeat class certification

Holding that possible recovery of roughly $124.68 per class member was too small to encourage individuals to bring suit, thereby making a class action a superior method of adjudicating the dispute

Holding that individual issues within state subclasses would render class action impracticable, even if litigated state-by-state

Holding that giving "confusing" and "affirmatively misleading" forms to immigrants charged with document fraud deprived the recipients of their due process rights

Holding that "individual damage determinations" did not defeat class typicality

Holding that two employees had standing to sue to recover overtime pay as provided under a collective bargaining agreement

Holding that small purchasers of potash could adequately represent the interests of large purchasers in the class

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"