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.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 18 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. Illinois Central Railroad.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Smith v. Illinois Central Railroad Anchor | green | “determining whether issues common to the class predominate over individual issues requires the court to identify the substantive issues that will control the outcome, assess which issues will predominate, and then determine whether these issues are common to the class. such an i…” | 6 |
| 2 | Smith v. Illinois Central Railroad | green | “the test for predominance is not whether the common issues outnumber the individual ones, but whether common or individual issues will be the object of most of the efforts of the litigants and the court.” | 5 |
| 3 | Rodmaker v. JOHNS HOLDING CO., INC. | green | “when an individual question does exist which is more time consuming and more difficult to prove than the common question which is readily proved, that situation tends to negate the predominant status of the common question.” | 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.