EQT Production Company v. Robert Adair

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that common practices that bear on the central issue in the litigation support a finding of predominance
• stating that a district court must definitively determine that the requirements of Rule 23 have been satisfied and that “[c]ertifying a class in the face of . . . uncertainty runs afoul of the rule that ‘actual, not presumed, conformance with Rule 23(a) [is] . . . indispensable’”
• instructing district court to consider possibility of anti-fail-safe rule on remand
• faulting the district court’s reasoning because it was not “rigorous” enough
• “That the defendants engaged in numerous common practices may be sufficient for commonality purposes.” (emphasis added)
• “Neither we nor the district court knows the number of deed variations or the materiality of the discrepant language.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).