2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 10 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 Ventura v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ventura v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp. Anchor | green | “unlike the 'predominance' requirement of rule 23(b)(3), rule 23(a)(2) requires only that the class movant show that a common question of law or fact exists; the movant need not show, at this stage, that the common question overwhelms the individual questions of law or fact which…” | 5 |
| 2 | Schwartz v. Upper Deck Co. | green | “although there is no explicit requirement concerning the class definition in frcp 23, courts have held that the class must be adequately defined and clearly ascertainable before a class action may proceed,” | 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.