G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2015–2017 ·
…ourts have taken the common sense approach that the class is united by a common interest in determining whether defendant's course of conduct is in its broad outlines actionable, which is not defeated by slight differences in class members' positions
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Gollomp v. MNC Financial, Inc.
But cf. Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976) (allowing certification despite analogous problems); Green v. Wolf Corp., 406 F.2d 291 (2d Cir.1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 977 , 89 S.Ct. 2131 , 23 L.Ed.2d 766 (1969). 3 .
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Estakhrian v. Obenstine
ourts have taken the common sense approach that the class is united by a common interest in determining whether defendant's course of conduct is in its broad outlines actionable, which is not defeated by slight differences in class members' positions
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Spann v. J.C. Penney Corp.
ourts have taken the common sense approach that the class is united by a common interest in determining whether defendant's course of conduct is in its broad outlines actionable, which is not defeated by slight differences in class members' positions
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Armour v. Network Associates, Inc.
courts have generally declined to consider conflicts, particularly as they regard damages, sufficient to defeat class action status at the outset unless the conflict is apparent, imminent, and on an issue at the very heart of the suit
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Dekro v. Stern Bros. & Co.
we think procedures can be found and used which will provide fairness to the defendants and a genuine resolution of disputed issues while obviating the danger of subverting the class action with delaying and harassing tactics
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Sugar Antitrust Litigation.
(2×)
. . . the fairness of the pressure i. e., the sociological merits of the small claims class action is not a question for us to decide. the fact is that congress, by authorizing . . . rule 23(b)(3) created a vehicle to put small claimants in an economically feasible litigating pos…
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
American Crystal Sugar Co. v. United States District Court for the Northern District
(2×)
. . . the fairness of the pressure - i. e., the sociological merits of the small claims class action - is not a question for us to decide. the fact is that congress, by authorizing . . rule 23(b)(3) created a vehicle to put small claimants in an economically feasible litigating p…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hum v. Dericks
Ct. 57, 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976), relied upon by Hum for the proposition that a single course of conduct gives rise to class certification, rested in part on the fact that individual reliance on misrepresentations need not be shown under the securities laws relevant to that action. 524 F.2d at 905 .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Smith v. MCI Telecommunications Corp.
However, the actual amount of damages “is invariably an individual question and does not defeat class action treatment.” Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 905 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97, S. Ct. 57, 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); see also McQuilken, 576 F.Supp. at 1029 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Gammella v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack , 524 F.2d 891 , 901 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976) (trial judge deciding class certification motion "is necessarily bound to some degree of speculation by the uncertain state of the record on which he must rule"). 17 In Salvas , we also rejected the motion judge's reliance on the defendant's own record-keeping deficiencies as a grounds to deny class certification.
discussed
Cited "see"
Kleinman v. Merck & Co., Inc.
"Although class certification may not be denied based on the factual merits of a complaint, some preliminary analysis of the legal theory on which the action is based is required." Fink v. Ricoh Corp., 365 NJ.Super. 520, 538, 839 A. 2d 942 (Law Div.2003) (emphasis added); accord Delgozzo, supra, 266 N.J.Super. at 180-81 , 628 A.2d 1080 (stating a court must not "make a preliminary determination of the merits of the underlying claims"). "`The court is bound to take the substantive allegations of the complaint as true, thus necessarily making the class order speculative in the sense that the pla…
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Intelligroup Securities Litigation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
National Federation of the Blind v. Target Corp.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 901 n. 17 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 901 n. 17 (9th Cir.1975), cert, denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mendez v. Radec Corp.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 905 (9th Cir.1975) (“The amount of damages is invariably an individual question and does not defeat class action treatment”) (quoted in Visa Check/MasterMoney, 280 F.3d at 139 ), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); see also Gold Strike Stamp Co. v. Christensen, 436 F.2d 791, 796, 798 (10th Cir.1970) (“The fact that there may have to be individual examinations on the issue of damages has never been held [to be] a bar to class actions”) (quoted in Visa Check/MasterMoney, 280 F.3d at 139 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. v. Dynegy, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 909 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976) (conflict on damages does not preclude class certification unless it is imminent and at the very heart of the suit); Kalodner, 172 F.R.D. at 207 (same). 4.
cited
Cited "see"
Lacasse v. Washington Mutual, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 901 n. 17 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976). 5 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Lyon v. Caterpillar, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 901 n. 17 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); see also Stewart v. Associates Consumer Discount Co., 183 F.R.D. 189, 193 (E.D.Pa.1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Dunleavy v. Nadler
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 909 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Brink v. First Credit Resources
See id. (quoting Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 905 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976)); O’Connor, 180 F.R.D. at 371 .
cited
Cited "see"
Roseman v. Sports & Recreation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 906 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re California Micro Devices Securities Litigation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 908-09 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Green v. Occidental Petroleum Corp, 541 F.2d 1335 , 1341-46 (9th Cir.1976) (Sneed, concurring); Wool v. Tandem Computers Inc, 818 F.2d 1433, 1436-38 (9th Cir.1987).
cited
Cited "see"
Weinman v. Fidelity Capital Appreciation Fund (In Re Integra Realty Resources, Inc.)
See generally Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 910-11 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
Adams v. Reagan
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Tedesco v. Mishkin
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902-03 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Behrens v. Wometco Enterprises, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 909 n. 25 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976). 8 This testimony at best would be pure speculation.
cited
Cited "see"
Katz v. Comdisco, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 905-06 (9th Cir.1975), ce rt. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Texas International Securities Litigation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Linton v. Shearson Lehman/American Express, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kamean v. Local 363, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Vulcan Society v. Fire Department of White Plains, 82 F.R.D. 379, 401 (S.D.N.Y.1979).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hagen v. City of Winnemucca
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902-3 (9th Cir.1975) cert, denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976) (fraud perpetrated on numerous persons by use of similar representations appealing situation for class actions).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ario v. Metropolitan Airports Commission
(2×)
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir.1975), cert. den. 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Foltz v. U.S. News & World Report, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 909 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
Streicher v. Prescott
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 909 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
AM. BOOKSELLERS ASS'N, INC. v. Rendell
See Commonwealth v. MacDonald, 464 Pa. 435 , 347 A.2d 290 (1975), cert. denied 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976). 19 As Justice Roberts opined, [I]t is clear that if material is “utterly without redeeming social value” it must certainly lack “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value” so that requirement ... of the Miller standard is met.
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Victor Technologies Securities Litigation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); McFarland v. Memorex Corp., 96 F.R.D. 357, 362 (N.D.Cal.1982); In re United States Financial Securities Litigation, 64 F.R.D. 443, 448 (S.D.Cal.1974); In re Memorex Securities Litigation, 61 F.R.D. 88, 96 (N.D.Cal.1973).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sanders v. Thrall Car Manufacturing Co.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 906 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).” Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. Standard Metals Corp., 541 F.Supp. 1109, 1112 (W.D.Okla.1982). 18 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Wilkinson v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 905 (9th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976) (inquiring into the merits of claim inappropriate on class certification motion).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pistoll v. Lynch
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See generally Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 900-01 (9th Cir.1975), ce rt. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Wolfson v. Solomon, 54 F.R.D. 584, 589-90 (S.D.N.Y.1972).
cited
Cited "see"
American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National Bank Of Oregon
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 907 n.22 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
American Timber & Trading Co. v. First National Bank
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 907 n.22 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,697 John P. Decker v. Massey-Ferguson, Limited
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Green v. Wolf Corp., 406 F.2d 291 (2d Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 977 , 89 S.Ct. 2131 , 23 L.Ed.2d 766 (1969).
discussed
Cited "see"
Frankel v. Wyllie & Thornhill, Inc.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Competitive Associates, Inc. v. Laventhol, Krekstein, Horwath & Horwath, 516 F.2d 811 (2d Cir. 1975); Greenspan v. Brassier, 78 F.R.D. 130 (S.D.N.Y.1978); Herm v. Stafford, 461 F.Supp. 508 (W.D.Ky.1978).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, Two Cases. Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, White & Case, Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, Peat, Marwick, Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, Roger O. Walther, Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, James F. Joy, Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, Donald A. Fergusson and Robert A. Fergusson, Wachovia Bank and Trust Co., N. A. (As Trustee and Agent for Various Trust Accounts) v. National Student Marketing Corporation, Cortes W. Randell
That provision is concerned with the type of fraud alleged by plaintiffs "a complex market manipulation rather than individual misstatements or omissions." Wachovia, 461 F.Supp. at 1007 ; see Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 903 n.19, 907 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dura-Bilt Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Corp.
(2×)
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 906 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. v. Piper Air craft Corp., 480 F.2d 341, 373-74 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 910 , 94 S.Ct. 231 , 38 L.Ed.2d 148 (1973); Tucker v. Arthur Andersen & Co., 67 F.R.D. 468, 480 (S.D.N.Y.1975).
discussed
Cited "see"
Wachovia Bank v. National Student Marketing Corp.
That provision is concerned with the type of fraud alleged by plaintiffs — “a complex market manipulation rather than individual misstatements or omissions.” Wachovia, 461 F.Supp. at 1007 ; see Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 903 n.19, 907 (9th Cir. 1975), cert, denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
Richard L. Zweig and Muriel Bruno v. The Hearst Corporation, a Corporation, Alex N. Campbell, H. W. Jamieson, E. L. Oesterle
(2×)
And as the Supreme Court noted in Affiliated Ute Citizens, supra, when a Rule 10b-5 action is based on nondisclosure, causation of harm is sufficiently proved by a showing of materiality. 406 U.S. at 154 , 92 S.Ct. 1456 ; See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 906-07 (9th Cir. 1975), Cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Shapiro v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc., 495 F.2d at 238-41.
discussed
Cited "see"
Morgan v. Laborers Pension Trust Fund for Northern California
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 902-905 (9 Cir. 1975), cert, denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976); Like v. Carter, 448 F.2d 798, 802 (8 Cir. 1971), cert, denied, 405 U.S. 1045 , 92 S.Ct. 1309 , 31 L.Ed.2d 588 (1972).
cited
Cited "see"
Hochschuler v. G. D. Searle & Co.
See Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891 , 901 n. 17 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Wachovia Bank & Trust Co. v. National Student Marketing Corp.
See 15 U.S.C. § 78b. 14 Since this is not a case where the allegations in the complaint fall entirely within the scope of express provisions of the securities laws, 15 and since the allegations *1007 primarily concern a complex market manipulation rather than individual misstatements or omissions, see Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 907 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 816 , 97 S.Ct. 57 , 50 L.Ed.2d 75 (1976), the Court concludes that plaintiffs have stated a claim under § 10(b) of the 1934 Act and § 17(a) of the 1933 Act. 16 A different conclusion is reached with respect to plaint…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hankerson
v.
North Carolina
v.
North Carolina
No. 75-6568.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 4, 1976.
Cited by 371 opinions | Published
Sup. Ct. N. C. Motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and certiorari granted.