Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 40 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Daniel Campbell v. City of Los Angeles.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Daniel Campbell v. City of Los Angeles Anchor | green | “(1) claim a violation of the flsa, (2) are 'similarly situated,' and (3) affirmatively opt in to the joint litigation, in writing.” | 25 |
| 2 | Aaron Senne v. Kansas City Royals Baseball | green | “significantly, as long as the proposed collective's 'factual or legal similarities are material to the resolution of their case, dissimilarities in other respects should not defeat collective treatment.” | 12 |
| 3 | Sheffield v. Orius Corp. | green | “this court considers the term 'similarly situated' in light of the purposes and goals of a collective action.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.