Seventh Circuit· 10/14/2008

Arreola v. Godinez

Citations

546 F.3d 788
2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 21502
2008 WL 4553059

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

recognizing that “the need for individual damages determinations does not, in and of itself, require denial of [a] motion for certification” under Rule 23(b)(3)
recognizing that “the need for individual damages determinations does not, in and of itself, require denial of [a] motion for certification” under rule 23(b)(3)
holding that a “no crutches” policy that forces inmates to walk on their broken ankles is deliberate indifference
recognizing that “the need for individual damages determinations does not, in and of itself, require denial of [a] motion for certification” under Rule 23(b)(3)
holding that the plaintiff “did have standing to pursue this lawsuit,” but explaining that “whether he may serve as an adequate class representative” is a “separate question[]”
stating that district courts have \broad discretion\ to deny leave to amend where there is \repeated failure to cure deficiencies\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bauer, Wood, Evans

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

136 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.