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 2 cases, quoted by 15 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 Timothy Cherry v. Dometic Corporation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Timothy Cherry v. Dometic Corporation Anchor | green | “ascertainability is an implied prerequisite of rule 23.” | 7 |
| 2 | Busby v. JRHBW Realty, Inc. | green | “typicality measures whether a sufficient nexus exists between the claims of the named representatives and those of the class at large.” | 5 |
| 3 | Busby v. JRHBW Realty, Inc. | green | “a class representative must possess the same interest and suffer the same injury as the class members in order to be typical under rule 23(a)(3). typicality measures whether a sufficient nexus exists between the claims of the named representatives and those of the class at large.” | 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.