green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
7.5 score
“the explicit mention of the applicability of rule 23 bolsters our conclusion that rule ... is applicable to class actions maintained under the act.”
Treatment trajectory · 1979 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1979
2002
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 32 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Walsh v. Ford Motor Co.
the explicit mention of the applicability of rule 23 bolsters our conclusion that rule ... is applicable to class actions maintained under the act.
discussed
Cited "see"
Anderson v. Cornejo
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1124 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1980); Barney v. Holzer Clinic, Ltd., 110 F.3d 1207, 1213-14 (6th Cir.1997); Gammon v. GC Services Ltd.
discussed
Cited "see"
General Motors Corp. v. Bloyed
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106 , 1132 n. 44 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) (stating that “the strength of the plaintiffs ease on the merits balanced against the amount offered” is the crucial factor in evaluating the fairness of the settlement).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Boesky Securities Litigation
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1124-33 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 96,400 in Re Ivan F. Boesky Securities Litigation, William Fries, Ii, John Lippitt, Jacquelyn Tribolet and William Nelson Harris, Trustee Under the William Nelson Harris and Myrtle Whitsett Harris Trust
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1124-33 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Findley v. Blinken (In Re Joint Eastern & Southern District Asbestos Litigation)
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) (abuse of discretion to deny plaintiff objectors discovery requests to show that negotiations were irregular and settlement prejudiced interests of class members).
cited
Cited "see"
Henry v. City of Detroit Manpower Department
See In re General Motors Corporation Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1118 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); 15 C.
cited
Cited "see"
Artell M. Henry (81-1767) v. City of Detroit Manpower Department, Douglas L. Gordon (81-5827) v. George Wilson, Al Parke, Dr. Hodge, Norman E. Cox (81-5878) v. Union Carbide Corporation, Ronny Lee Parrish (82-5009) v. John O. Marsh, Jr., Secretary of the Army
See In re General Motors Corporation Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1118 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); 15 C.
cited
Cited "see"
Little v. Devils Lake-Sioux Manufacturing Corp.
See Livingston v. Ewing, 601 F.2d 1110, 1114 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 147 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) (interpretation of “employment practice” within meaning of 2000e-2(i)).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re \Agent Orange\" Product Liability Litigation"
Manual for Complex Litigation § 1.46 (5th ed. 1981); see In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1133 (7th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Livingston v. Ewing
See Livingston v. Ewing, 601 F.2d 1110 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 147 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Shuffman v. Hartford Textile Corp.
See In re Hartford Textile Corp., 588 F.2d 872 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 , reh’g denied, 444 U.S. 975 , 100 S.Ct. 473 , 62 L.Ed.2d 392 (1979).
cited
Cited "see"
Hartford Textile Corporation v. Hartford Textile Corporation
See In re Hartford Textile Corp., 588 F.2d 872 (2d Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 , reh'g denied, 444 U.S. 975 , 100 S.Ct. 473 , 62 L.Ed.2d 392 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Ralph T. Miller & Joan Miller, in Re Subpoena Duces Tecum of James M. Russ
(2×)
Accord United States v. Franklin, 598 F.2d 954, 957 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 147 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Maria Mendoza, Individually and on Behalf of Stephen Mendoza, a Minor Theresa Trujillo, Individually and on Behalf of Albert Trujillo, Joe Trujillo, and David Trujillo, Minors Alberto Sanchez, Individually and on Behalf of Jaime Sanchez, Ana Celis Sanchez, John Sanchez, Ernest Sanchez, George Sanchez, and Betty Sanchez, Minors and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, and Julia O. Flores, Billie Gutierrez, Theresa Medina, Betty M. Granillo, Carol Cruz-Popkin, Barney Paul Popkin, Carmen P. Urrutia, Manuel Alvarado, Carolyn Hackworth, Gloria Hagler, Johnny Randolph-Kelly, Thelma B. Manriquez, Aldolfo A. Suarez, Nat Washington Ii, Ralph O. Gomez, Juan Brito, Marcia Almeda, Emilia Talamantez, Ellen Lee Esperanza Silva, Antonette Romo, Ronald Q. Huerta, and Lupe Montano, Plaintiffs-Objectors-Appellants v. United States of America, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellee v. Tucson School District Number 1 the Board of Education, Tucson School District Number 1 Leba Wine, Soleng Tom, Mitchell Vavich, Helen Haffley, and Katie Dusenberry, Individually and as Members, Board of Education, Tucson School District Number 1 Thomas Lee, Individually and as Superintendent of Tucson School District Number 1
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1213-16 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1115 , 99 S.Ct. 1020 , 59 L.Ed.2d 74 (1979). 28 Recognizing these inherent risks in class suits, the Rules of Civil Procedure attempt to counter them by imposing procedural requirements on the conduct of such actions.
discussed
Cited "see"
Landry v. Sabine Independent Seamen's Ass'n
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1128 n.33 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Advisory Committee Notes to F.R.Civ.P. 23; cf. Thomas v. Weinberger, 384 F.Supp. 540, 543 (S.D.N.Y.1974) (comparison with injunctive or declaratory relief). 3 The propriety of injunctive relief depends on the validity of the 1977 election and should be determined by the district court on remand.
discussed
Cited "see"
John W. Landry v. Sabine Independent Seamen's Association
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1128 n.33 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Advisory Committee Notes to F.R.Civ.P. 23; cf. Thomas v. Weinberger, 384 F.Supp. 540, 543 (S.D.N.Y.1974) (comparison with injunctive or declaratory relief). 3 The propriety of injunctive relief depends on the validity of the 1977 election and should be determined by the district court on remand. 10 There is no provision for attorneys' fees for violations of § 411.
discussed
Cited "see"
Mendoza v. United States
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Pettway v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co., 576 F.2d 1157, 1213-16 (5th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1115 , 99 S.Ct. 1020 , 59 L.Ed.2d 74 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kevin Armstrong v. Board Of School Directors Of The City Of Milwaukee
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1120 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Moreland v. Rucker Pharmacal Co., 63 F.R.D. 611, 615 (W.D.La.1974). 23 In addition to this concern with the interests of class members, there is a concern with the interests of the public as a whole.
discussed
Cited "see"
Armstrong v. Board of School Directors
See In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106, 1120 (7th Cir. 1979), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979); Moreland v. Rucker Pharmacal Co., 63 F.R.D. 611, 615 (W.D.La. 1974).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State Ex Rel. Byrd v. Chadwick
See also In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106, 1133 (7th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom., Oswald v. General Motors Corp., 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bloyed v. General Motors Corp.
See Cotton, 559 F.2d at 1331 ; Shebay, 717 S.W.2d at 684 ; see also In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106, 1137 (7th Cir.) (finding that acquiescence to a bad deal is different from affirmative support), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Feivel Gottlieb Thomas R. Bloom Leroy B. Mott Marialice Mott Kim Coles Rosemary T. Martin Kirk Martin Mark G. Cucarola, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated and Albert D. Schonbrunn, Timothy L. Welch and Dorothy A. Welch v. Q.T. Wiles Gerald Goodman William R. Hambrecht Gary E. Koenig Russell E. Planitzer Paul N. Risinger Patrick J. Schleibaum Jesse C. Parker William P. Lorea Owen Taranta Kenneth A. Huff Warren Perry Hambrecht & Quist Group Hambrecht & Quist Venture Partners Coopers & Lybrand J.H. Whitney & Co. J.H. Whitney Associates Coopers & Lybrand (Singapore) Coopers & Lybrand (Hong Kong) Phoenix Venture (Bvi) Limited H & Q Ventures International C v. H & Q Ventures IV William R. Hambrecht, as Trustees of the Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust Sarah Hambrecht, as Trustees of the Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust Q.T. Wiles Investment Joint Venture I J.F. Shea Co., Inc. William R. Timken Arthur Rock H & Q Alliance Fund Hamquist Banner Partners Bryco Investments Peter O. Crisp H & Q Investors Crisp Computer Corporation Edgar L. Lowe Richard M. Kulp, as Trustees of the Kulp 1983 Revocable Trust Paloa S. Kulp, as Trustees of the Kulp 1983 Revocable Trust John R. Johnston and Ta-Lin Hsu v. Stewart Carrell Charles P. Waite, Jr. W. Denman Van Ness Robert O. Evans Kenneth L. Guernsey Daniel Case Theodore H. Heinrichs Clifford H. Higgerson Patrick J. Sansonetti George M. Drysdale Kenneth B. Hart and Michael O. Preletz, Third-Party
See also, In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106, 1121 (7th Cir.) (a Rule 23(b)(3) class action in which the court stated that in Asgrow it had "held that the failure of the appellants to intervene in the action foreclosed their right to appeal"), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gottlieb v. Wiles
See also, In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106, 1121 (7th Cir.) (a Rule 23(b)(3) class action in which the court stated that in Asgrow it had “held that the failure of the appellants to intervene in the action foreclosed their right to appeal”), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States ex rel. McCoy v. California Medical Review, Inc.
See, e.g., In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106, 1123-24 (7th Cir.) (trial court abused its discretion when it did not permit objectors discovery concerning settlement negotiations), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Dubin v. Miller
See, e.g., In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 (7th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n of the United States, Inc. v. Abrams
Compare 15 U.S.C. §§ 15a-15h (explicitly vesting power in state Attorneys General to maintain actions against persons engaged in anti-competitive practices which harm state consumers).” In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litig., 594 F.2d 1106 , 1128 n. 33 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sue Boelens, Individually and as Next Friend of Julie Boelens and Jennifer Boelens v. Redman Homes, Inc. & Republic Homes of Texas, Inc., Sue Boelens, Individually and as Next Friend of Julie Boelens and Jennifer Boelens, Cross-Appellee v. Redman Homes, Inc., Cross-Appellant, and Republic Homes of Texas, Inc.
See, e.g., In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 7 Cir., 594 F.2d 1106 , 1132 n. 44, cert. denied, 1979, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 ; Skelton v. General Motors Corp., N.D.Ill.1980, 500 F.Supp. 1181, 1191 , rev'd on other grounds, 7 Cir.1981, 660 F.2d 311 , cert. denied, 1982, 456 U.S. 974 , 102 S.Ct. 2238 , 72 L.Ed.2d 848 ; Novosel v. Northway Motor Car Corp., N.D.N.Y.1978, 460 F.Supp. 541, 545 . 9 Given that damages for economic loss may be assumed to be recoverable under the MMWA, we held in MacKenzie that a resort to state law was proper to determine "t…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Boelens ex rel. Boelens v. Redman Homes, Inc.
See, e.g., In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 7 Cir., 594 F.2d 1106 ,1132 n. 44, cert. denied, 1979, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 ; Skelton v. General Motors Corp., N.D.Ill.1980, 500 F.Supp. 1181,1191 , rev’d on other grounds, 7 Cir.1981, 660 F.2d 311 , cert. denied, 1982, 456 U.S. 974 , 102 S.Ct. 2238 , 72 L.Ed.2d 848 ; Novosel v. Northway Motor Car Corp., N.D.N.Y. 1978, 460 F.Supp. 541, 545 . 9 Given that damages for economic loss may be assumed to be recoverable under the MMWA, we held in MacKenzie that a resort to state law was proper to determine �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
26 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1077, 26 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 32,066 Mzell Williams v. United States District Court, Southern District of Ohio, W.D. At Cincinnati
See also Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Langer, 168 F.2d 182, 187 (8th Cir. 1948) ("The class action was an invention of equity ... mothered by the practical necessity of providing a procedural device so that mere numbers would not disable large groups of individuals, united in interest, from enforcing their equitable rights nor grant them immunity from their equitable wrongs.") In re General Motors Corporation Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1127-28 n. 33 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) (class action device is primarily a device to vindic…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Williams v. United States District Court
See also Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Langer, 168 F.2d 182, 187 (8th Cir. 1948) (“The class action was an invention of equity .. . mothered by the practical necessity of providing a procedural device so that mere numbers would not disable large groups of individuals, united in interest, from enforcing their equitable rights nor grant them immunity from their equitable wrongs.”) In re General Motors Corporation Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1127-28 n. 33 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) (class action device is primarily a device to v…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
23 Fair empl.prac.cas. 20, 23 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,029 Wesley P. Bernard v. Gulf Oil Company
(2×)
Compare Rodgers I, supra with In re General Motors Corp. Engine Interchange Litigation, 594 F.2d 1106 , 1138 n.57 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 870 , 100 S.Ct. 146 , 62 L.Ed.2d 95 (1979) 1 Judge Godbold makes this point nicely in his panel dissent: The wide disparity between what was done here and normal judicial procedures is demonstrated by posing this question: "What would have happened if Gulf had asked for a temporary injunction imposing the exact restrictions that were imposed in this case?" I believe that the court would have insisted upon requirements of notice, time limits, proof…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Shuffman
v.
Hartford Textile Corp.
v.
Hartford Textile Corp.
No. 79-178.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 1, 1979.
Cited by 15 opinions | Published
Citer courts: District of Columbia (1)
C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.