2013 United States Supreme Court case
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend Full case name Comcast Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Caroline Behrend, et al. Docket no. 11-864 Citations 569 U.S. 27 (more ) Opinion announcement Opinion announcement Prior 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. 933 (2012). Courts certifying classes must thoroughly vet prospective classes for all four requirements even if the court's analysis touches on the merits of the claim.
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan
Majority Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito Dissent Ginsburg and Breyer, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend , 569 U.S. 27 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that courts certifying classes must thoroughly vet prospective classes for all four requirements even if the court's analysis touches on the merits of the claim.[ 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.[ 2]
References
External links
Statutes and regulations Supreme Court case law
Sherman Antitrust Act Section 1 case lawSherman Antitrust Act Section 2 case lawOther Sherman Antitrust Act cases
United States v. E. C. Knight Co. (1895)
United States v. Trans-Missouri Freight Association (1897)
Addyston Pipe & Steel Co. v. United States (1899)
Northern Securities Co. v. United States (1904)
Swift & Co. v. United States (1905)
Loewe v. Lawlor (1908)
Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. (1911)
United States v. Terminal Railroad Association (1912)
Chicago Board of Trade v. United States (1918)
United States v. Colgate & Co. (1919)
Federal Baseball Club v. National League (1922)
United States v. General Electric Co. (1926)
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States (1939)
Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States (1940)
Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC (1941)
United States v. Masonite Corp. (1942)
United States v. Univis Lens Co. (1942)
Parker v. Brown (1943)
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n (1944)
Associated Press v. United States (1945)
Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States (1945)
Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. (1946)
United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. (1948)
United States v. United States Gypsum Co. (1948–1950)
Besser Manufacturing Co. v. United States (1951)
Times-Picayune Publishing Co. v. United States (1953)
Toolson v. New York Yankees, Inc. (1953)
United States v. International Boxing Club of New York, Inc. (1955)
Radovich v. National Football League (1957)
Klor's, Inc. v. Broadway-Hale Stores, Inc. (1959)
United States v. Parke, Davis & Co. (1960)
Haywood v. National Basketball Association (1971)
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1971)
Flood v. Kuhn (1972)
Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS Inc. (1979)
California Retail Liquor Dealers Ass'n v. Midcal Aluminum, Inc. (1980)
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Inc. v. Hydrolevel Corp. (1982)
Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. (1985)
Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. (1992)
Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California (1993)
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. (2006)
North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC (2015)
Interstate Commerce Act case lawClayton Antitrust Act case lawFTC Act case lawRobinson–Patman Act case lawOther cases
Other federal case law Ongoing litigation ‡ Related topics ‡ date of filing