Dow Chem. Co. v. Stephenson, 539 U.S. 111 (2003). · Go Syfert
Search
Dow Chem. Co. v. Stephenson, 539 U.S. 111 (2003). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case · …res judica-ta generally applies to bind absent class members except where to do so would violate due process" and "ue process requires adequate representation at all times throughout the litigation. ⚠ not in text
195 citation events (192 in the last 25 years) across 17 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In re Payment Card Interchange Fee & Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation (ca2, 2016-06-30)
Treatment trajectory · 2003 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2003 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) In re Payment Card Interchange Fee & Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation (2×)
2d Cir. · 2016 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence low
res judica-ta generally applies to bind absent class members except where to do so would violate due process" and "ue process requires adequate representation at all times throughout the litigation.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust
2d Cir. · 2016 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
res judicata generally applies to bind absent class members except where to do so would violate due process" and "ue process requires adequate representation at all times throughout the litigation.
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Re \Agent Orange\" Prod. Liability Litig."
2d Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
Co. v. Stephenson, 539 U.S. 111 , 112 (2003). -13- 1 Agent Orange I did not prevent them from pursuing their claims. 2 Id. at 261.6 3 II.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Isaacson v. Dow Chemical Co.
2d Cir. · 2008 · confidence medium
Co., 539 U.S. at 112.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Janik v. Rudy, Exelrod & Zieff
Cal. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
(Ibid.; Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co. (2nd Cir. 2001) 273 F.3d 249, 258 , affd. in part & vacated in part in Dow Chemical Co. v. Stephenson (2003) 539 U.S. 111, 112 [ 156 L.Ed.2d 106 , 123 S.Ct. 2161 ].) There is some disagreement as to whether collateral review of the adequacy of representation should be limited to situations in which the class action court has not passed on the matter, and as to whether collateral review should consider only whether the procedures in the prior litigation afforded the absent class members full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue.
examined Cited "see" Wolfert v. Transamerica Home First (3×)
1st Cir. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co., 273 F.3d 249, 260 (2d Cir.2001), aff'd in part by an equally divided court and vacated in part, 539 U.S. 111 , 123 S.Ct. 2161 , 156 L.Ed.2d 106 (2003); In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 996 F.2d 1425, 1435 (2d Cir.1993); In re Real Estate Title and Settlement Services Antitrust Litigation, 869 F.2d 760 (3d Cir.1989); Gonzales v. Cassidy, 474 F.2d 67, 72 (5th Cir.1973); see generally Patrick Wooley, The Availability of Collateral Attack for Inadequate Representation in Class Suits, 79 Tex. L.Rev. 383, 384-86 & nn.1-9 (2000).
examined Cited "see" Wolfert ex rel. Estate of Wolfert v. Transamerica Home First, Inc. (3×)
2d Cir. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co., 273 F.3d 249, 260 (2d Cir.2001), aff'd in part by an equally divided court and vacated in part, 539 U.S. 111 , 123 S.Ct. 2161 , 156 L.Ed.2d 106 (2003); In re Agent Orange Product Liability Litigation, 996 F.2d 1425, 1435 (2d Cir.1993); In re Real Estate Title and Settlement Services Antitrust Litigation, 869 F.2d 760 (3d Cir.1989); Gonzales v. Cassidy, 474 F.2d 67, 72 (5th Cir.1973); see generally Patrick Woolley, The Availability of Collateral Attack for Inadequate Representation in Class Suits, 79 Tex. L.Rev. 383, 384-86 & nn.1-9 (2000).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Moody v. Sears Roebuck and Co. (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co., 273 F.3d 249, 257-59 (2d Cir. 2001), aff’d in pertinent part by equally divided *272 Court, 539 U.S. 111 , 156 L.
examined Cited "see, e.g." Lamarque v. Fairbanks Capital Corp. (6×)
R.I. · 2007 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Stephenson v. Dow Chemical Co., 273 F.3d 249 (2nd Cir.2001), aff'd in pertinent part by an equally divided Court, 539 U.S. 111 , 123 S.Ct. 2161 , 156 L.Ed.2d 106 (2003). .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
DOW CHEMICAL CO. ET AL.
v.
STEPHENSON ET AL.
02-271.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jun 9, 2003.
539 U.S. 111
Per Curiam.
Cited by 47 opinions  |  Published
2 passages pin-cited by 2 cases
Pinpoint authority: #5,775 of 633,719
Citer courts: Second Circuit (3)
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

Seth P. Waxman argued the cause for petitioners. With him on the briefs were Louis R. Cohen, Andrew L. Frey, Philip Allen Lacovara, Charles A. Rothfeld, Richard B. Katskee, Michele L. Odorizzi, Steven Brock, and John C. Sabetta.

Gerson H. Smoger argued the cause for respondents. With him on the brief were Mark R. Cuker and Ronald Simon.[*]

[*112] PER CURIAM.

With respect to respondents Joe Isaacson and Phyllis Lisa Isaacson, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit is vacated, and the case is remanded for further consideration in light of Syngenta Crop Protection, Inc. v. Henson, 537 U. S. 28 (2002).

With respect to respondents Daniel Raymond Stephenson, Susan Stephenson, Daniel Anthony Stephenson, and Emily Elizabeth Stephenson, the judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

JUSTICE STEVENS took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

[*] Briefs of amici curiae urging reversal were filed for the American Insurance Association et al. by Herbert M. Wachtell, Jeffrey M. Wintner, Craig A. Berrington, Lynda S. Mounts, Jan S. Amundson, Quentin Riegel, and Robin S. Conrad; for the Product Liability Advisory Council by John H. Beisner; and for the Washington Legal Foundation by Daniel J. Popeo and Richard A. Samp.

Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed for the State of Louisiana et al. by Richard P. Ieyoub, Attorney General of Louisiana, and by the Attorneys General for their respective States as follows: Mike Beebe of Arkansas, J. Joseph Curran, Jr., of Maryland, Mike Hatch of Minnesota, Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon of Missouri, and Mike McGrath of Montana; for the American Legion et al. by William A. Rossbach and P. B. Onderdonk, Jr.; for the Association of Trial Lawyers of America by Jeffrey Robert White; for Law Professors by David L. Shapiro, John Leubsdorf, and Henry P. Monaghan; for the Lymphoma Foundation of America et al. by Raphael Metzger; for Public Citizen by Brian Wolfman; and for Trial Lawyers for Public Justice by Brent M. Rosenthal, Leslie Brueckner, and Misty A. Farris.

Patrick Lysaught filed a brief for the Defense Research Institute as amicus curiae.