green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.3 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2002 ·
…the most adequate plaintiff ... is the person or group of persons that ... in the determination of the court, has the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002
2014
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Albert Fadem Trust v. CITIGROUP INC.
(2×)
the most adequate plaintiff ... is the person or group of persons that ... in the determination of the court, has the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cavanaugh v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California
(2×)
See In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 255 (3d Cir.2001), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 122 S.Ct. 1300 , 152 L.Ed.2d 212 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re David Cavanaugh in Re Michael Hannon in Re Richard Weiss in Re Raymond Pfeifer in Re Robert Herrgott, David Cavanaugh Michael Hannon Richard Weiss Raymond Pfeifer Robert Herrgott v. United States District Court for the Northern District of California, Quinn Barton, Real Party in Interest
(2×)
See In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 255 (3d Cir.2001), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 122 S.Ct. 1300 , 152 L.Ed.2d 212 (2002).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tanne v. Autobytel, Inc.
(2×)
Feb.6, 1997); see also In re Cendant Corp. Litigation, 264 F.3d 201, 263 (3d Cir.2001) (stating that “[t]he initial inquiry (i.e., the determination of whether the movant with the largest interest in the case ‘otherwise satisfies’ Rule 23) should be confined to determining whether the movant has made a prima facie showing of typicality and adequacy”), cert. denied, 535 U.S. 929 , 122 S.Ct. 1300 , 152 L.Ed.2d 212 (2002); Gluck v. CellStar Corp., 976 F.Supp. 542, 546 (N.D.Tex.1997) (“Evidence regarding the requirements of Rule 23 will, of course, be heard in full at the class certifica…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
University of Minnesota
v.
Maitland
v.
Maitland
01-995.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 18, 2002.
Published
Citer courts: S.D. New York (2)
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA ET AL.
v.
MAITLAND.
No. 01-995.
Supreme Court of the United States.
March 18, 2002.
1
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 260 F. 3d 959.