In Re Holocaust Victim Assets Litigation, Gizella Weisshaus

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “potential obstacles to the pursuit of an independent lawsuit do not ‘impair or impede the applicant’s ability to protect [its] interest,’ Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a)(2), to an extent warranting intervention as of right”
• holding that intervention for the purpose of objecting to the Settlement Class “at this late stage would prejudice the existing parties by destroying their Settlement and sending them back to the drawing board”
• holding that an application to intervene delayed by eight months was untimely
• reasoning that intervention at such a late stage would prejudice the existing parties by “destroying their [s]ettlement and sending them back to the drawing board”
• finding that “[b]ecause appellants remain free to file a separate action, they have not established that they will be prejudiced if their motion to intervene is denied”
• affirming denial to permissively intervene where district court found that intervention would prejudice the rights of the existing parties

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).