3 canonical passages across 3 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 Smith v. Sprint Communications Company.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Smith v. Sprint Communications Company Anchor | green | “confronted with a request for settlement-only class certification, a district court need not inquire whether the case, if tried, would present intractable management problems, for the proposal is that there be no trial.” | 8 |
| 2 | Muro v. Target Corp. | green | “although 'the typicality requirement may be satisfied even if there are factual distinctions between the claims of the named plaintiffs and those of other class members,' the requirement 'primarily directs the district court to focus on whether the named representatives' claims …” | 7 |
| 3 | Uhl v. Thoroughbred Technology And Telecommunications | green | “abandon the federal rules merely because a settlement seems fair, or even if the settlement is a 'good deal.' in some ways, the rule 23 requirements may be even more important for settlement classes.” | 5 |
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.