Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
| Comcast Corp. v. Behrend | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 
 | |||||||
| Argued November 5, 2012 Decided March 27, 2013 | |||||||
| Full case name | Comcast Corp. v. Behrend | ||||||
| Docket nos. | 11-864 | ||||||
| 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, Alito, Kennedy, Thomas | ||||||
| Dissent | Ginsburg and Breyer, joined by Kagan, Sotomayor | ||||||
| Laws applied | |||||||
| Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) | |||||||
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend is a 2013 U.S. 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 Friday, March 04, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.
