42 Cited authorities

In re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litig.
552 F.3d 305 (3d Cir. 2008) Cited 937 times 36 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs must make more than a mere " threshold showing," they must establish facts " by the preponderance of the evidence"
Pension Fund v. Marine Bank
85 N.Y.2d 20 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 1,552 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the definition of deceptive acts and practices under GBL § 349 includes "representations or omissions"
Oshana v. Coca-Cola Co.
472 F.3d 506 (7th Cir. 2006) Cited 838 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the typicality requirement was not satisfied where the plaintiff's proposed class "include[d] people who knew fountain Diet Coke contained saccharin and bought it anyway" when the plaintiff "claim[ed] she was deceived and injured"
Miles v. Merrill Lynch & Co.
471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 790 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"
Beth Israel Med. v. Hori. Blue Cross
448 F.3d 573 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 695 times
Holding that whether a hospital's failure to object to a lower reimbursement rate over a period of eight years constituted a waiver of its contractual right to the higher reimbursement rate was a question of fact
Stutman v. Chemical Bank
95 N.Y.2d 24 (N.Y. 2000) Cited 780 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that statutory consumer-fraud claims do "not require proof of actual reliance," but do require causation
Small v. Lorillard Tobacco Co.
94 N.Y.2d 43 (N.Y. 1999) Cited 712 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that where the underlying tort theory fails, "there is no independent tort to provide a basis for liability under . . . concert of action, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting theories"
Teamsters v. Bombardier
546 F.3d 196 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 464 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the “preponderance of the evidence standard applies to evidence proffered to establish Rule 23's requirements”
In re Flag Telecom Holdings
574 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 2009) Cited 369 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation
McLaughlin v. Tobacco Co.
522 F.3d 215 (2d Cir. 2008) Cited 306 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that an aggregate determination that “bears little or no relationship to the amount of economic harm actually caused” violates the Rules Enabling Act
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 36,300 times 1254 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"
Section 213 - Actions to be commenced within six years: where not otherwise provided for; on contract; on sealed instrument; on bond or note, and mortgage upon real property; by state based on misappropriation of public property; based on mistake; by corporation against director, officer or stockholder; based on fraud
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 213 Cited 5,632 times 9 Legal Analyses
Applying six-year statute of limitations to actions "for which no limitation is specifically prescribed by law"
Section 214 - Actions to be commenced within three years: for non-payment of money collected on execution; for penalty created by statute; to recover chattel; for injury to property; for personal injury; for malpractice other than medical, dental or podiatric malpractice; to annul a marriage on the ground of fraud
N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214 Cited 5,555 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing for three-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions
Section 349 - Deceptive acts and practices unlawful
N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349 Cited 5,000 times 112 Legal Analyses
Granting "any person who has been injured by reason of any violation of this section" the right to "bring an action in his own name"

Weiner v. Snapple Beverage Corporation

42 Cited authorities

Holding that plaintiffs must make more than a mere " threshold showing," they must establish facts " by the preponderance of the evidence"

Holding that the definition of deceptive acts and practices under GBL § 349 includes "representations or omissions"

Holding that the typicality requirement was not satisfied where the plaintiff's proposed class "include[d] people who knew fountain Diet Coke contained saccharin and bought it anyway" when the plaintiff "claim[ed] she was deceived and injured"

Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"

Holding that whether a hospital's failure to object to a lower reimbursement rate over a period of eight years constituted a waiver of its contractual right to the higher reimbursement rate was a question of fact

Holding that statutory consumer-fraud claims do "not require proof of actual reliance," but do require causation

Holding that where the underlying tort theory fails, "there is no independent tort to provide a basis for liability under . . . concert of action, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting theories"

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

Holding that plaintiffs' evidence of news events and the expert's event study did not provide sufficient evidence of causation

Holding that an aggregate determination that “bears little or no relationship to the amount of economic harm actually caused” violates the Rules Enabling Act

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"

Applying six-year statute of limitations to actions "for which no limitation is specifically prescribed by law"

Providing for three-year statute of limitations for personal injury actions

Granting "any person who has been injured by reason of any violation of this section" the right to "bring an action in his own name"