In re Hannaford Bros.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding “that Hannaford may or may not have a good [refund] program to satisfy aggrieved customers, but .. . the Hannaford program is not relevant to my superiority determination under the class certification decision”
• “Rule 26(a)(2) does not allow parties to cure deficient expert reports by supplementing them with later deposition testimony, or the function of expert reports would be completely undermined.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Scotts EZ Seed Litigation
  S.D. New York· 2015-01-26· cited 65×
• Waller v. Hewlett-Packard Co.
  S.D. California· 2013-09-29· cited 17×
• In re Dial Complete Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
  D. New Hampshire· 2015-12-08· cited 14×
• Robert W. Clough, II on behalf of himself and other similarly situated v. Revenue Frontier, LLC et al.
  D. New Hampshire· 2019-06-19· cited 1×
• In re Colgate-Palmolive Softsoap Antibacterial Hand Soap Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
  D. New Hampshire· 2015-11-16
• Medoff v. CVS Caremark (RI)
  D. New Hampshire· 2016-02-17
• In re: Dial Complete Marketing
  D. New Hampshire· 2015-12-08

Cites

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

• Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor
  Supreme Court· 1997-06-25· cited 4,991×
• Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
  Supreme Court· 2011-06-20· cited 4,653×
• General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon
  Supreme Court· 1982-06-14· cited 4,068×
• General Telephone Co. of the Northwest, Inc. v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
  Supreme Court· 1980-05-12· cited 1,072×
• In Re: The Prudential Insurance Company Of America Sales Practices Litigation
  Third Circuit· 1998-07-23· cited 840×
• In Re American Medical Systems, Inc. Pfizer, Inc.
  Sixth Circuit· 1996-02-15· cited 761×
• Maximo HILAO, Class Plaintiffs, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ESTATE OF Ferdinand MARCOS, Defendant-Appellant
  Ninth Circuit· 1996-12-17· cited 402×
• Leonard J. Klay v. Humana, Inc.
  Eleventh Circuit· 2004-09-01· cited 388×
• Smilow v. Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc.
  First Circuit· 2003-03-07· cited 300×
• Andrews v. Bechtel Power Corp.
  First Circuit· 1985-12-19· cited 277×
• In Re New Motor Vehicles Can. Export Anti. Lit.
  First Circuit· 2008-03-28· cited 236×
• McLaughlin v. American Tobacco Co.
  Second Circuit· 2008-04-03· cited 224×
• Steamfitters Local Union No. 420 Welfare Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc.
  Third Circuit· 1999-03-29· cited 219×
• Beattie v. CenturyTel, Inc.
  Sixth Circuit· 2007-12-18· cited 211×
• Yokoyama v. Midland National Life Insurance
  Ninth Circuit· 2010-02-08· cited 151×
• In Re Aqua Dots Products Liability Litigation
  Seventh Circuit· 2011-08-17· cited 139×
• Gaynell McCuin v. Secretary of Health and Human Services
  First Circuit· 1987-04-14· cited 122×
• Unnamed case
  Ninth Circuit· 2001-11-07· cited 113×
• Garcia-Rubiera v. Calderon
  First Circuit· 2009-06-30· cited 105×
• In re Fibreboard Corp.
  Fifth Circuit· 1990-01-25· cited 96×