3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 78 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 Robidoux v. Celani.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Robidoux v. Celani Anchor | green | “when it is alleged that the same unlawful conduct was directed at or affected both the named plaintiff and the class sought to be represented, the typicality requirement is usually met irrespective of minor variations in the fact patterns underlying individual claims.” | 55 |
| 2 | Baffa v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation | green | “1) plaintiffs interests are antagonistic to the interest of other members of the class and 2) plaintiffs attorneys are qualified, experienced and able to conduct the litigation.” | 13 |
| 3 | Baffa v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Securities Corporation | green | “qualified, experienced and able to conduct the litigation.” | 10 |
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.