Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 3/27/2013

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

Citations

  • 133 S. Ct. 1426
  • 185 L. Ed. 2d 515
  • 2013 U.S. LEXIS 2544
  • 569 U.S. 27
  • 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 125
  • 85 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 118
  • 81 U.S.L.W. 4217
  • 57 Communications Reg. (P&F) 1487
  • 2013 WL 1222646

About this case

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

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

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comcast_Corp._v._Behrend&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: References")

  1. ↑ Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013).
  2. ↑ Campos, Sergio (March 29, 2013). "Opinion analysis: No common ground" . SCOTUSblog. Retrieved October 14, 2025.

External links

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comcast_Corp._v._Behrend&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: External links")

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comcast_Corp._v._Behrend&oldid=1351348158 "

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

Oral argument

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that analysis of the required FRCP 23(a) elements “will frequently entail ‘overlap with the merits of the plaintiffs underlying claim.’ ”
  • holding that plaintiffs seeking certification of damages questions must produce a model establishing that damages are measurable on a classwide basis
  • ruling that the moving party cannot rely on methodology “that identifies damages that are not the result of the wrong.”
  • holding that “at the class certification stage ... any model supporting a plaintiffs damages case must be consistent with its liability case”
  • concluding that plaintiffs’ antitrust nationwide class action was improperly certified and holding that “damages must be capable of measurement on a classwide basis”
  • holding that the party seeking class certification must also satisfy through evidentiary proof at least one of the provisions of Rule 23(b)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scalia

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

25 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.