§Why CasetextPricing

Sobel et al v. Hertz Corporation

MOTION for final approval of the settlement

22 Cited authorities

  1. Staton v. Boeing Co.

    327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,987 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"

  2. Rodriguez v. W. Publ'g Corp.

    563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1,110 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that settlement was substantively fair and reasonable to the class

  3. National Rural Telecommunications Co-op. v. Directv, Inc.

    221 F.R.D. 523 (C.D. Cal. 2004)   Cited 573 times
    Applying to Rule 23 settlement

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

    688 F.2d 615 (9th Cir. 1982)   Cited 1,160 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"

  5. Class Plaintiffs v. City of Seattle

    955 F.2d 1268 (9th Cir. 1992)   Cited 782 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the relevant indenture agreement allowed the trustee to "bring tort and fraud claims on behalf of the bondholders"

  6. Linney v. Cellular Alaska Partnership

    151 F.3d 1234 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 419 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a settlement was fundamentally fair when it created a $6 million settlement fund for the plaintiff class without releasing their claims and provided extensive injunctive relief

  7. Cotton v. Hinton

    559 F.2d 1326 (5th Cir. 1977)   Cited 796 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding settlement despite fact that little formal discovery had been conducted and noting that, "[b]eing an extra judicial process, informality in the discovery of information is desired"

  8. Molski v. Gleich

    318 F.3d 937 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 327 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that decisions based on per se rules are not appropriate because they nullify the discretion vested in the district court through Rule 23

  9. Torrisi v. Tucson Elec. Power Co.

    8 F.3d 1370 (9th Cir. 1993)   Cited 390 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that we review adequacy de novo

  10. In re PaineWebber Ltd. Partnerships Litigation

    171 F.R.D. 104 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)   Cited 180 times
    Finding class representatives' claims sufficiently typical when they invested in only twenty of seventy partnerships

  11. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 36,137 times   1252 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 1715 - Notifications to appropriate Federal and State officials

    28 U.S.C. § 1715   Cited 1,326 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Providing list of information required to be included with the CAFA notice

  13. Section 482.31575 - Advertisement of lease: Disclosure of certain information required; exception

    Nev. Rev. Stat. § 482.31575   Cited 4 times

    1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, a short-term lessor shall advertise, quote and charge a rate for leasing a passenger car which includes the entire amount that a short-term lessee must pay to lease the car for the period to which the rate applies, except taxes, charges for mileage and any fees paid to airports, including, without limitation, any concession fees which the short-term lessor pays to do business at an airport and which the short-term lessor charges to the short-term lessee