Horn v. Ross

How courts have described this case

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

• reasoning that defendant’s challenge to the commonality requirement, based on individual questions with respect to timeliness, was “outside the scope of Rule 23 and indeed defies the principle enunciated in Eisen”
• reasoning that defendant's challenge to the commonality requirement, based on individual questions with respect to timeliness, was \outside the scope of Rule 23 and indeed defies the principle enunciated in Eisen \
• holding minor variations in written securities prospectuses no bar to certification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).