4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 20 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 Fitzpatrick v. General Mills, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fitzpatrick v. General Mills, Inc. Anchor | green | “he putative class must meet each of the four requirements specified in 23(a), as well as at least one of the three requirements set forth in 23(b).” | 8 |
| 2 | Fabricant v. Roebuck | green | “rule 23(a)(4)'s adequacy requirement has two components: (1) the class representative has no interests antagonistic to the class; and (2) class counsel possesses the competence to undertake the litigation.” | 5 |
| 3 | David Rutstein v. Avis Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc. | green | “a class action may be maintained only when it satisfies all of the requirements of fed. r. civ. p. 23(a) and at least one of the alternative requirements of rule 23(b).” | 4 |
| 4 | Williams v. Mohawk Industries, Inc. | green | “under the rule 23(a)(2) commonality requirement, a class action must involve issues that are susceptible to class-wide proof.” | 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.