11 canonical passages across 9 cases, quoted by 96 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 Myers v. Hertz Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Myers v. Hertz Corp. Anchor | green | “make a 'modest factual showing' that they and potential opt-in plaintiffs 'together were victims of a common policy or plan that violated the law.” | 30 |
| 2 | Benavides v. Serenity Spa NY Inc. | green | “courts in this district commonly grant requests for the production of names, mailing addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers, and dates of employment in connection with the conditional certification of a flsa collective action.” | 19 |
| 3 | Korenblum v. Citigroup, Inc. | green | “had the benefit of full discovery,” | 8 |
| 4 | Korenblum v. Citigroup, Inc. | green | “for similar reasons, courts do 'not resolve factual disputes, decide ultimate issues on the merits, or make credibility determinations' at the first stage.” | 7 |
| 5 | Roberta Braunstein v. Eastern Photographic Laboratories, Inc. And Heart of America Portraits, Inc. | green | “although one might read the flsa, by deliberate omission, as not providing for notice . . . it makes more sense, in light of the 'opt-in' provision of 16(b) of the act, 29 u.s.c. 216 (b), to read the statute as permitting, rather than prohibiting, notice in an appropriate case.” | 6 |
| 6 | Realite v. Ark Restaurants Corp. | green | “by making a modest factual showing sufficient to demonstrate that they and potential plaintiffs together were victims of a common policy or plan that violated the law.” | 6 |
| 7 | Yap v. Mooncake Foods, Inc. | green | “because equitable tolling issues often arise as to individual opt-in plaintiffs ..., courts frequently permit notice to be keyed to the three-year period prior to the filing of the complaint, with the understanding that challenges to the timeliness of individual plaintiffs' acti…” | 5 |
| 8 | Creely v. HCR ManorCare, Inc. | green | “it is more likely that a group of similarly situated individuals may be uncovered by soliciting opt-in plaintiffs'-in other words, that plaintiffs have, through discovery, 'advanced the ball down the field.” | 4 |
| 9 | Creely v. HCR ManorCare, Inc. | green | “the court still will not decide the ultimate merits of the case or issues better suited for a decertification motion.” | 4 |
| 10 | Guan Ming Lin v. Benihana Nat'l Corp. | green | “plaintiff's supporting allegations must be specific, not conclusory” | 4 |
| 11 | Wilner v. OSI Collection Services, Inc. | green | “numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation” | 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.