S.D. Florida· 9/26/2002
In re Managed Care Litigation
Citations
- 209 F.R.D. 678
- 2002 WL 31154945
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding that the plaintiffs satisfied the adequacy prong and explaining that plaintiffs’ lack of understanding of some of the complexities of the case did not make them inadequate, especially when the plaintiffs are represented by zealous counsel
- \Courts are generally reluctant to deny class certification based on speculative problems with case management.\
- “Because the Provider Plaintiffs have demonstrated a common scheme or course of conduct, they also have shown typicality.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Moreno
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Leonard J. Klay v. Humana, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 2004-09-01· cited 388×
- In re Terazosin Hydrochloride Antitrust LitigationS.D. Florida· 2004-04-08· cited 81×
- In Re Managed Care LitigationS.D. Florida· 2003-12-08· cited 54×
- Agostino v. Quest Diagnostics Inc.D. New Jersey· 2009-02-11· cited 47×
- Colomar v. Mercy Hospital, Inc.S.D. Florida· 2007-04-11· cited 33×
- County of Monroe v. Priceline.Com, Inc.S.D. Florida· 2010-03-15· cited 23×
- In re Welding Fume Products Liability LitigationN.D. Ohio· 2007-09-14· cited 20×
- In Re Managed Care LitigationS.D. Florida· 2002-12-12· cited 17×
- Chavez v. Our Lady of Lourdes Hosp. at PascoWashington Supreme Court· 2018-04-19· cited 15×
- Freedom Life Ins. Co. of America v. WallantDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-12-29· cited 14×
- Jones v. American General Life & Accident InsuranceS.D. Georgia· 2002-12-13· cited 13×
- Eisen v. Independence Blue CrossSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 2003-11-20· cited 7×
- DWFII Corp. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceS.D. Florida· 2010-12-10· cited 7×
- Coastal Neurology, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceS.D. Florida· 2010-11-30· cited 6×
- Wachtel v. Guardian Life InsuranceD. New Jersey· 2004-08-05· cited 5×
Cites
42 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court· 1997-06-25· cited 4,991×
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court· 1982-06-14· cited 4,068×
- Dianne Castano v. The American Tobacco CompanyFifth Circuit· 1996-05-23· cited 871×
- Robert D. Sprague, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. General Motors Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeSixth Circuit· 1998-01-07· cited 738×
- Ronald O. Pelletier v. Gary D. Zweifel, Ronald O. Pelletier v. Gary D. ZweifelEleventh Circuit· 1991-01-29· cited 385×
- In the Matter of Rhone-Poulenc Rorer IncorporatedSeventh Circuit· 1995-04-27· cited 358×
- Albert Kornberg and Laura Kornberg v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 1984-09-18· cited 279×
- Kirkpatrick v. J.C. Bradford & Co.Eleventh Circuit· 1987-09-15· cited 247×
- Ernest L. Griffin, Cross-Appellees v. Carl Carlin, Postmaster General, Cross-AppellantEleventh Circuit· 1985-03-28· cited 236×
- 31 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1707, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,668 Gloria Holmes v. Continental Can CompanyEleventh Circuit· 1983-06-09· cited 231×
- Lewis v. CurtisThird Circuit· 1982-03-03· cited 194×
- Cox v. American Cast Iron Pipe Co.Eleventh Circuit· 1986-03-26· cited 192×
- Andrews v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Eleventh Circuit· 1996-09-19· cited 148×
- Simon v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1973-07-10· cited 88×
- Sikes v. Teleline, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 2002-02-13· cited 83×
- Clay v. American Tobacco Co.S.D. Illinois· 1999-07-09· cited 77×
- Hudson v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 1996-09-20· cited 73×
- Buford v. H & R Block, Inc.S.D. Georgia· 1996-07-11· cited 67×
- Walco Investments, Inc. v. ThenenS.D. Florida· 1996-06-27· cited 66×
- Missildine v. Ideal Baking Co.M.D. Louisiana· 1980-04-02· cited 52×
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.