40 Cited authorities

  1. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts

    472 U.S. 797 (1985)   Cited 1,623 times   18 Legal Analyses
    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”
  2. Arreola v. Godinez

    546 F.3d 788 (7th Cir. 2008)   Cited 506 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff "did have standing to pursue this lawsuit," but explaining that "whether he may serve as an adequate class representative" is a "separate question[]"
  3. Keele v. Wexler

    149 F.3d 589 (7th Cir. 1998)   Cited 636 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff had Article III standing where defendant tried to collect an illegal collection fee, even if plaintiff did not pay the fee
  4. Rosario v. Livaditis

    963 F.2d 1013 (7th Cir. 1992)   Cited 693 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff's claim is typical if it arises from the same event or practice giving rise to the claims of other class members and is based on the same legal theory as the class members
  5. Carnegie v. Household Int'l

    376 F.3d 656 (7th Cir. 2004)   Cited 239 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant who urges a court to certify a class for settlement, and prevails, may later contest certification for litigation if the settlement fails, but only as to manageability
  6. Ross v. Bank of America

    524 F.3d 217 (2d Cir. 2008)   Cited 158 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff must allege a personal stake in the outcome of the case and a “distinct and palpable” injury
  7. Pruitt v. City of Chicago, Illinois

    472 F.3d 925 (7th Cir. 2006)   Cited 151 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff could not seek redress for 20 years of harassment
  8. Esplin v. Hirschi

    402 F.2d 94 (10th Cir. 1969)   Cited 388 times
    In Esplin v. Hirschi, 402 F.2d 94 (10th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 928, 89 S.Ct. 1194, 22 L.Ed.2d 459, this court discussed the basic rules concerning class actions allowable under the newly amended Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and in particular class actions allowable under 23(b)(3).
  9. Evans v. U.S. Pipe Foundry Co.

    696 F.2d 925 (11th Cir. 1983)   Cited 251 times
    Explaining that the class representative is not required to establish the exact number in the proposed class
  10. Marcial v. Coronet Ins. Co.

    880 F.2d 954 (7th Cir. 1989)   Cited 204 times
    Holding that issues specific to each plaintiff predominated because the major issue in contention — whether the insurance company had fraudulently informed the plaintiffs that they could only recover under an insurance policy if they submitted to a polygraph test — depended upon evidence of the individual oral communications between the defendant and each plaintiff
  11. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 28,310 times   1149 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 227 - Restrictions on use of telephone equipment

    47 U.S.C. § 227   Cited 4,823 times   638 Legal Analyses
    Granting exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts over actions brought by state attorney generals
  13. Section 1658 - Time limitations on the commencement of civil actions arising under Acts of Congress

    28 U.S.C. § 1658   Cited 2,143 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the state-law tort period controls § 1983 actions