Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Argued November 5, 2012 Decided March 27, 2013 | |||||||
Full case name | Comcast Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Caroline Behrend, et al. | ||||||
Docket nos. | 11-864 | ||||||
Citations | |||||||
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement | ||||||
Prior history | decision against defendant, 264 F.R.D. 150 (E.D. Pa. 2010); affirmed, 655 F.3d 182 (3d Cir. 2011); rehearing en banc denied, unreported; certiorari granted, 567 U. S. ___ (2012) | ||||||
Holding | |||||||
Respondents’ class action was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(3). | |||||||
Court membership | |||||||
| |||||||
Case opinions | |||||||
Majority | Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito | ||||||
Dissent | Ginsburg and Breyer, joined by Kagan, Sotomayor | ||||||
Laws applied | |||||||
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) |
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. ___ (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with class certification under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.[1] The case restricted class certifications. The votes were split upon typical ideological lines, but, in an unusual move, the dissent was jointly written by two justices.
References
External links
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 6/6/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.