Search for: "Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin" Results 21 - 37 of 37
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
31 Mar 2008, 3:21 am
Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156 (1974) for the proposition that the court is precluded from a preliminary merits inquiry on class certification. [read post]
11 Jul 2011, 11:52 am by Sheppard Mullin
Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 177 (1974): "We find nothing in either the language or history of Rule 23 that gives a court any authority to conduct a preliminary inquiry into the merits of a suit in order to determine whether it may be maintained as a class action." [read post]
17 May 2013, 12:29 pm by Rebecca Tushnet
Carlisle & Jacquelin, 391 F.2d 555, 572 (2d Cir.1968) (Judge Lumbard, dissenting from remand)). [read post]
11 Feb 2015, 12:36 am by Andrew Trask
Carlisle & Jacqueline to blockade against either (1) inconvenient facts or (2) costly, time-consuming dives into certification-related issues. [read post]
10 Feb 2009, 7:11 am
  Complicating the issue is the statement by the United States Supreme Court's decision in Eisen v. [read post]
9 Jul 2008, 5:31 pm
Carlisle & Jacquelin, 417 U.S. 156, 179 (1974)). [read post]
17 Sep 2015, 10:21 am by Paul Karlsgodt
I was privileged to be invited to participate in a recent mini-conference with the Rule 23 Subcommittee to the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, the committee that evaluates and proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for consideration by the Supreme Court. [read post]
14 Feb 2009, 11:56 am
Part V identifies key unresolved issues in the state courts. [read post]