Skip to main content
D. Maine· 5/17/1991

Cooperman v. One Bancorp

Citations

  • 136 F.R.D. 526
  • 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7021

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that court has discretion, in cases where individualized claims are made, to \carve out subclasses or to try damages issues separately\
  • noting that court has discretion, in cases where individualized claims are made, to “carve out subclasses or to try damages issues separately”
  • the court may make a commonsense judgment in favor of nu-merosity based on the number of outstanding shares
  • typicality requirement satisfied because named plaintiffs’ claims “arise from the same series of events and are based on the same legal theories as the claims of all class members”
  • named plaintiffs' claims \typical of the claims of the class because the complaint alleges that Defendants engaged in a scheme or common course of conduct designed to deceive the investing public\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.