Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Albright v. Oliver

Holding that the plaintiff’s § 1983 claim failed where the plaintiff failed to establish that he was deprived of a substantive due process right secured by the Constitution

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

Taylor v. Sturgell

Holding that adequate representation requires that "[t]he interests of the nonparty and her representative are aligned" and "the party understood herself to be acting in a representative capacity."

Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore

Holding that district courts have discretion to refuse to apply offensive non-mutual collateral estoppel against a defendant if such an application of the doctrine would be unfair

Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp.

Holding that "full and fair opportunity to litigate" is satisfied by minimum procedural requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment

Concrete Pipe Prods. v. Constr. Laborers Trust

Holding that withdrawal liability as applied to Concrete Pipe, the employer, did not violate the Fifth Amendment because the imposition of withdrawal liability was clearly rational inasmuch as the employer's liability was based on a proportion of its contributions during its participation in the plan

Marrese v. American Academy of Ortho. Surgeons

Holding that the full faith and credit statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1738, "directs a federal court to refer to the preclusion law of the State in which judgment was rendered"

Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts

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”

Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Epstein

Holding that the Exchange Act's exclusive-jurisdiction provision sought "to achieve greater uniformity of construction and more effective and expert application of that law"

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Section 1738 - State and Territorial statutes and judicial proceedings; full faith and credit

Referring to "[t]he Acts of the legislature" in the full faith and credit context

Section 304.12-010 - Unfair competition - Unfair, deceptive practices prohibited

Section 304.12-080 - Unfair discrimination prohibited

Section 164.508 - Uses and disclosures for which an authorization is required

Defining valid authorizations, core elements, and required statements