20 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,611 times 504 Legal Analyses
Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
569 U.S. 27 (2013) Cited 2,217 times 232 Legal Analyses
Holding that at the class certification stage, "any model supporting a plaintiff's damages case must be consistent with its liability case"
Califano v. Yamasaki
442 U.S. 682 (1979) Cited 1,974 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that claimants could bring social security class action "at least so long as the membership of the class is limited to those who meet the requirements of § 205(g)"
Myers v. Hertz Corp.
624 F.3d 537 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 1,217 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"
Irizarry v. Catsimatidis
722 F.3d 99 (2d Cir. 2013) Cited 491 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the fact that an individual plaintiff's electronic signature appeared on paychecks was not dispositive
Teamsters v. Bombardier
546 F.3d 196 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 446 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the “preponderance of the evidence standard applies to evidence proffered to establish Rule 23's requirements”
Hart v. Rick's Cabaret Int'l, Inc.
967 F. Supp. 2d 901 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) Cited 267 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that strip club's exhaustive list of work rules, coupled with fines for non-compliance, indicated that dancers were employees
Bynog v. Cipriani Grp., Inc.
1 N.Y.3d 193 (N.Y. 2003) Cited 251 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding waiters as independent contractors when waiters worked at their own discretion, worked for competitors, and received limited instructions
Damassia v. Duane Reade, Inc.
250 F.R.D. 152 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) Cited 213 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that class and collective actions "'are mutually exclusive,' so suits seeking relief under the FLSA may proceed only through a collective action, and not a class action" (quoting Lachapelle v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 513 F.2d 286, 289 (5th Cir. 1975))
Ansoumana v. Gristede's Operating Corp.
255 F. Supp. 2d 184 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) Cited 122 times
Holding in FLSA context that “[a]n employer's characterization of an employee is not controlling, however, for otherwise there could be no enforcement of any minimum wage or overtime law”
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,808 times 1232 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"

Quedraogo v. A-1 International Courier Service, Inc. et al

20 Cited authorities

Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”

Holding that at the class certification stage, "any model supporting a plaintiff's damages case must be consistent with its liability case"

Holding that claimants could bring social security class action "at least so long as the membership of the class is limited to those who meet the requirements of § 205(g)"

Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"

Holding that the fact that an individual plaintiff's electronic signature appeared on paychecks was not dispositive

Holding that the “preponderance of the evidence standard applies to evidence proffered to establish Rule 23's requirements”

Holding that strip club's exhaustive list of work rules, coupled with fines for non-compliance, indicated that dancers were employees

Finding waiters as independent contractors when waiters worked at their own discretion, worked for competitors, and received limited instructions

Holding that class and collective actions "'are mutually exclusive,' so suits seeking relief under the FLSA may proceed only through a collective action, and not a class action" (quoting Lachapelle v. Owens-Illinois, Inc., 513 F.2d 286, 289 (5th Cir. 1975))

Holding in FLSA context that “[a]n employer's characterization of an employee is not controlling, however, for otherwise there could be no enforcement of any minimum wage or overtime law”

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"