§Why CasetextPricing

Hall v. Forbes Media LLC

MOTION to Stay Action

29 Cited authorities

  1. Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins

    578 U.S. 330 (2016)   Cited 7,401 times   437 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statutory violation, without more, did not give rise to Article III standing

  2. Clinton v. Jones

    520 U.S. 681 (1997)   Cited 2,694 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding in Section 1983 action no absolute immunity for damages arising from "unofficial conduct"

  3. Landis v. North American Co.

    299 U.S. 248 (1936)   Cited 8,275 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a decision to stay proceedings "calls for the exercise of judgment, which must weigh competing interests and maintain an even balance"

  4. Ohio Environmental Coun. v. U.S. Dist. Court

    565 F.2d 393 (6th Cir. 1977)   Cited 313 times
    Holding that "the District Court has broad discretion to stay proceedings as an incident to its power to control its own docket."

  5. Baker v. Adams County/Ohio Valley School Board

    310 F.3d 927 (6th Cir. 2002)   Cited 107 times
    Seeking a stay pending appeal first in the district court is "[t]he cardinal principle of stay applications" and denying the stay motion where "[t]he defendant did not so move below and has not made any showing that such a motion would be impracticable" (first alteration in original) (quoting 16A CHARLES ALAN WRIGHT, ARTHUR R. MILLER , & EDWARD H. COOPER, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 3954 (3d ed. 1999) )

  6. Coal. to Def. Aff. Act. v. Granholm

    473 F.3d 237 (6th Cir. 2006)   Cited 86 times
    Granting an emergency stay of a district court's order preliminarily enjoining the enforcement of Proposal 2 until July 1, 2007

  7. Martinez v. Rodriquez

    394 F.2d 156 (5th Cir. 1968)   Cited 152 times

    No. 24319. May 2, 1968. Rehearing Denied June 4, 1968. Robert Orseck, Nichols, Gaither, Beckham, Colson, Spence Hicks, and Podhurst Orseck, Miami, Fla., for appellant. Richard B. Adams, Jeanne Heyward, Dean, Adams, George Wood, Miami, Fla., for appellees and cross-appellants. Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, and COLEMAN and SIMPSON, Circuit Judges. JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge: The main issue presented in this case is whether a father who sues under Florida Stat. 768.03, F.S.A. to recover damages

  8. Michael v. Ghee

    325 F. Supp. 2d 829 (N.D. Ohio 2004)   Cited 44 times
    Relying on Landis v. North American Co., 299 U.S. 248, 81 L. Ed. 153, 57 S. Ct. 163 in granting contested motion to stay pending Supreme Court's final disposition of a separate case

  9. Patel v. Trans Union, LLC

    308 F.R.D. 292 (N.D. Cal. 2015)   Cited 17 times
    Certifying § 1681e(b) class

  10. Coulter-Owens v. Time Inc.

    CASE NO. 16-1321 (6th Cir. Jun. 26, 2017)   Cited 13 times
    Finding Spokeo did not apply when analyzing a violation of a substantive protection

  11. 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"

  12. Section 445.1711 - Definitions

    Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.1711   Cited 34 times

    As used in this act: (a) "Customer" means an individual who purchases, rents, or borrows a book, other written material, a sound recording, or a video recording. (b) "Employee" means an individual who works for an employer in exchange for wages or other remuneration. (c) "Employer" means a person that has 1 or more employees. (d) "Ordinary course of business" means activities related to the sale, rental, or lending of, or advertising in, materials described in section 2. (e) "Written" includes any