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 CourtListenerCited by
22 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Zirn v. VLI Corp.Supreme Court of Delaware· 1996-08-23· cited 130×
- Gaffin v. Teledyne, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware· 1992-08-26· cited 124×
- Cooke v. Manufactured Homes, Inc.Fourth Circuit· 1993-07-09· cited 110×
- Weld v. Glaxo Wellcome Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2001-05-01· cited 52×
- O'Neil v. AppelW.D. Michigan· 1996-02-29· cited 49×
- In re Ford Motor Co. Vehicle Paint LitigationE.D. Louisiana· 1998-08-25· cited 42×
- Rothwell v. Chubb Life Insurance Co. of AmericaD. New Hampshire· 1998-03-31· cited 29×
- CV Reit, Inc. v. LevyS.D. Florida· 1992-06-26· cited 27×
- In re Biogen Securities LitigationD. Massachusetts· 1997-09-04· cited 16×
- In re Polymedica Corp. Securities LitigationD. Massachusetts· 2004-09-07· cited 11×
- In Re the One Bancorp Securities LitigationD. Maine· 1993-02-12· cited 9×
- Rand v. M/A-COM, INC.D. Massachusetts· 1992-09-18· cited 7×
- Plumbers & Pipefitters National Pension Fund v. BurnsN.D. Ohio· 2013-06-03· cited 7×
- In re Urcarco Securities LitigationN.D. Texas· 1993-05-18· cited 7×
- Kinney v. Metro Global Media, Inc.D. Rhode Island· 2001-10-12· cited 5×
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 97,652Fourth Circuit· 1990-06-27
- Waters v. Earthlink, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court· 2006-05-11
- Rowe v. Marietta Corp.W.D. Tennessee· 1996-10-07
- Rothwell v. ChubbD. New Hampshire· 1998-03-31
- Schaffer v. Timberland C o .D. New Hampshire· 1996-03-19
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court· 1982-06-14· cited 4,068×
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court· 1974-05-28· cited 3,301×
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court· 1988-03-07· cited 3,007×
- Howard Wool v. Tandem Computers Incorporated, Robert C. Marshall, Henry v. Morgan, and James G. TreybigNinth Circuit· 1987-06-03· cited 673×
- Andrews v. Bechtel Power Corp.First Circuit· 1985-12-19· cited 277×
- Peil v. SpeiserThird Circuit· 1986-11-28· cited 185×
- Carlotta Rossini and Jane Zukofsky, on Behalf of Themselves and All Persons Similarly Situated v. Ogilvy & Mather, IncorporatedSecond Circuit· 1986-08-14· cited 139×
- Kirby v. Cullinet Software, Inc.D. Massachusetts· 1987-06-18· cited 41×
- Leonard v. BaumerC.D. California· 1988-06-24· cited 36×
- Priest v. Zayre Corp.D. Massachusetts· 1988-01-22· cited 35×
- Randle v. SpectranD. Massachusetts· 1988-09-30· cited 29×
- Weiss v. Drew National Corp.S.D. New York· 1976-05-28· cited 19×
- Cooperman v. One BancorpD. Maine· 1991-03-15· cited 12×
- Cutler v. Lewiston Daily SunD. Maine· 1985-06-17· cited 3×
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.