§Why CasetextPricing

Howard L. Howell, et al., v. JBI, Inc. et al

MEMORANDUM

26 Cited authorities

  1. Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor

    521 U.S. 591 (1997)   Cited 6,954 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

  2. Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.

    150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 3,052 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"

  3. Staton v. Boeing Co.

    327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,927 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"

  4. Matsushita Elec. Industrial Co. v. Epstein

    516 U.S. 367 (1996)   Cited 527 times   10 Legal Analyses
    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"

  5. Dunleavy v. Nadler

    213 F.3d 454 (9th Cir. 2000)   Cited 869 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an incentive award to the class representatives

  6. Churchill Village v. General Electric

    361 F.3d 566 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 737 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that approval of a settlement that received 45 objections and 500 opt-outs out of 90,000 class members was proper

  7. Qantas Airways Ltd. v. Foremost International Tours

    429 U.S. 816 (1976)   Cited 402 times
    Affirming class certification

  8. 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

  9. Officers for Justice v. Civil Serv. Comm'n

    688 F.2d 615 (9th Cir. 1982)   Cited 1,126 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding a settlement must stand or fall in its entirety because a district court cannot "delete, modify or substitute certain provisions"

  10. Blackie v. Barrack

    524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975)   Cited 1,136 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the need to determine individualized damages does not defeat class certification

  11. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 34,931 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 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,465 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  13. Section 9 - Jurisdiction of courts; duty of United States attorneys; procedure

    15 U.S.C. § 9   Cited 22 times   1 Legal Analyses

    The several district courts of the United States are invested with jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of section 8 of this title; and it shall be the duty of the several United States attorneys, in their respective districts, under the direction of the Attorney General, to institute proceedings in equity to prevent and restrain such violations. Such proceedings may be by way of petitions setting forth the case and praying that such violations shall be enjoined or otherwise prohibited