Skip to main content
S.D. New York· 11/14/2006

Mattera v. Clear Channel Communications, Inc.

Citations

  • 239 F.R.D. 70
  • 2006 WL 3316967
  • 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82928

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that defendant that employed and paid most of plaintiff class was “significant defendant” because it would be responsible for most of relief sought: payment of unlawfully withheld wages
  • finding it \reasonably likely that more than two-thirds of the putative class members of the proposed class — all of whom work in New York — are citizens of New York.\
  • finding absent defendant qualified as indispensable because [absent defendant] would undoubtedly be prejudiced if a judgment is rendered in this action in its absence, given that the complaint is directed towards [absent defendant]'s own compensation structure and policies.”
  • considering affidavits provided by both parties in resolving a CAFA matter
  • absentee owner-employer was a necessary party where complaint sought class-wide injunctive and declaratory relief from the owner of the workplace, even if ownership had changed
  • “It is difficult to see how [plaintiff] could be accorded complete relief without [absent party], the entity that employs and, moreover, pays and makes charge backs to the wages of, members of the putative class.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Chin

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.