N.D. Georgia· 6/2/1997

In re Polypropylene Carpet Antitrust Litigation

Citations

178 F.R.D. 603
1997 WL 836502

How courts have described this case

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

observing that “at the class certification stage, Plaintiffs must show that antitrust impact can be proven with common evidence on a classwide basis; Plaintiffs need not show antitrust impact in fact occurred on a classwide basis.”
criticizing Agricultural Chemicals for “performing a function that is ... best reserved for a fact-finding stage of the proceedings”
applying factors in Rule 23(b)(3)(A)-(D) in the context of antitrust claims and finding that “the class action procedure is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy”
“Generally, common proof of the existence of a price-fixing conspiracy will predominate at trial if the plaintiffs plan to rely upon evidence of the defendants’ conduct, rather than the conduct of individual class members.”
stating rule in context of class certification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

29 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

Other cases named In re Polypropylene Carpet Antitrust Litigation

3 other CourtListener records share this case name.

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.