green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.1 score
“under rule 23(c)(1), district courts are required to reassess their class rulings as the case develops.”
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
James v. PacifiCorp
under rule 23(c)(1), district courts are required to reassess their class rulings as the case develops.
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Baber
It is defendant's "heavy burden" to show that a potential conflict of interest "affected, or operated on, or [bore] a substantial relation to the conduct of the defense" ( People v Sanchez , 21 NY3d 216, 223 [2013] [internal quotation marks and citation omitted]; see People v Longtin , 92 NY2d 640, 644 [1998], cert denied 526 US 1114 [1999]; People v McCann , 126 AD3d 1031, 1035 [2015], lv denied 25 NY3d 1167 [2015]).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Diet Drugs (Phentermine, Fenfluramine, Dexfenfluramine) Products Liability Litigation
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Welding Fume Products Liability Litigation
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., Inc., 176 F.R.D. 479, 489 (E.D.Pa.1997), affirmed, 161 F.3d 127 (3rd Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999) (observing that a court "must attempt to strike the fine balance between permissibly identifying the issues that the case will present for purposes of determining whether the requirements of Rule 23 have been met and impermissibly deciding those issues on the merits”). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Liggett Group, Inc. v. Engle
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999); Castano v. American Tobacco Co., 84 F.3d 734 (5th Cir.1996); Estate of Mahoney v. R.J.
cited
Cited "see"
Szczubelek v. Cendant Mortgage Corp.
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127, 140 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Beverly
Although these concepts are most often at play in the context of simultaneous or successive client representations, they are, in our view, equally applicable to the circumstances of this case where counsel’s performance, objectively evaluated, reveals that divided loyalties created a conflict which “ ‘operated on’ ” the proper representation of his client (People v Ortiz, supra at 657 , quoting People v Alicea, 61 NY2d 23, 31 ; see People v Longtin, 92 NY2d 640 , 644 cert denied 526 US 1114 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Bates
Nor is there any evidence that “the claimed conflict of interest [had] a direct affect on the representation” (People v Ahar, 290 AD2d 592, 593 , lv granted 98 NY2d 672 ; see People v Longtin, 92 NY2d 640, 644 , cert denied 526 US 1114 ).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Rezulin Products Liability Litigation
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127 , 132 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999) (court-supervised medical monitoring fund is “paradigmatic request for injunctive relief”); In re Diet Drugs, No. Civ.
cited
Cited "see"
Osgood v. Harrah's Entertainment, Inc.
See Barnes v. American Tobacco, Inc., 176 F.R.D. 479 (E.D.Pa.1997), aff'd, 161 F.3d 127 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
People v. Smart
Even assuming the prior acquaintance rose to a level implicating the conflict of interest concerns addressed in Gomberg and its progeny, defendant failed to meet his burden of establishing that “the conduct of his defense was in fact affected by the operation of the conflict of interest” (People v Alicea, 61 NY2d 23, 31 ; see, People v Longtin, 92 NY2d 640 , cert denied 526 US 1114 ; People v Recupero, 73 NY2d 877 ; People v Perez, 70 NY2d 773 ; People v Cruz, 63 NY2d 848 ).
cited
Cited "see"
Mills v. Wilkerson
See Reinhardt v. Reinhardt, 97-1889 (La.App. 1 Cir. 9/25/98) , 720 So.2d 78 , writ denied, 98-2697 (La.12/8/98), 734 So.2d 635 , cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1761 , 143 L.Ed.2d 792 (1999).
cited
Cited "see"
Miller v. Hygrade Food Products Corp.
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127, 140 (3d Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Philip Morris Inc. v. Angeletti
See Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 176 F.R.D. 479, 500 (E.D.Pa.1997), aff'd, 161 F.3d 127 (3rd Cir.1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 , 119 S.Ct. 1760 , 143 L.Ed.2d 791 (1999); see also Emig v. American Tobacco Co., 184 F.R.D. 379, 389 (D.Kan.1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Moelis v. Berkshire Life Insurance
See, e.g., Barnes v. American Tobacco Co., 161 F.3d 127, 149 (3d Cir. 1998), cert. denied, 526 U.S. 1114 (1999) (declining to certify class of smokers because, among other reasons, need to conduct individualized inquiry into statute of limitations defense for each plaintiff “augurs that a class action will devolve into a lengthy series of individual trials”).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
AVR, Inc.
v.
City of St. Louis Park
v.
City of St. Louis Park
No. 98-1482.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 17, 1999.
Published
Ct. App. Minn. Certiorari denied.