Charron v. Wiener

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that objectors “have no automatic right to discovery or an evidentiary hearing in order to substantiate their objections”
• finding no violation of Rule 23(a)(4) absent evidence of a “fundamental conflict between class members necessitating separate representation”
• “[D]istrict courts must make sure that the members of the class possess the same interests, and that no fundamental conflicts exist among the members.”
• first citing McReynolds, 588 F.3d at 803–04; and then citing D’Amato, 236 F.3d at 85
• “To ensure that all members of the class are adequately represented, district courts must make sure that the members of the class possess the same interests, and that no fundamental conflicts exist among the members.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).