S.D. Ohio· 3/9/1993
Mayo v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Citations
- 148 F.R.D. 576
- 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11113
- 1993 WL 163455
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that, for purposes of a class certification motion, the court must accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint and may draw reasonable inferences therefrom
- holding that the court should not consider the merits when deciding whether to certify the class
- finding predominance when plaintiffs’ “allegations turn on [defendant’s] use of identical forms, common sales techniques, and routinized procedures”
- common questions predominate where plaintiffs’ allegations hinge on the use of standardized forms and routine procedures
- finding availability of statutory attorney fees weighed against superiority
- finding availability of statutory attorney fees weighed against superiority
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Rice
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
32 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Hamilton v. Ohio Savings BankOhio Supreme Court· 1998-06-10· cited 249×
- Cope v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceOhio Supreme Court· 1998-07-29· cited 97×
- Hamilton v. Ohio Sav. BankOhio Supreme Court· 1998-06-10· cited 78×
- Bentley v. Honeywell International Inc.S.D. Ohio· 2004-09-23· cited 47×
- McGee v. East Ohio Gas Co.S.D. Ohio· 2001-05-23· cited 35×
- Miller v. Farmer Bros. Co.Court of Appeals of Washington· 2003-02-24· cited 33×
- Miller v. Farmer Bros.Court of Appeals of Washington· 2003-02-24· cited 27×
- Fox v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.E.D. Michigan· 1995-05-31· cited 24×
- BP America Production Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of Colorado· 2011-10-31· cited 23×
- Cope v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.Ohio Supreme Court· 1998-07-29· cited 22×
- In Re Woodward & Lothrop Holdings, Inc.S.D. New York· 1997-02-11· cited 21×
- Bovee v. Coopers & LybrandS.D. Ohio· 2003-07-30· cited 19×
- Ross v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.S.D. Ohio· 2009-05-21· cited 19×
- Kutschbach v. DaviesS.D. Ohio· 1995-03-31· cited 16×
- Ritt v. Billy Blanks EnterprisesOhio Court of Appeals· 2007-04-12· cited 15×
- Edwards v. McCormickS.D. Ohio· 2000-10-31· cited 15×
- Reeb v. Ohio Department of RehabilitationS.D. Ohio· 2001-10-25· cited 14×
- Putnam v. DaviesS.D. Ohio· 1996-09-26· cited 14×
- Beckmann v. CBS, Inc.D. Minnesota· 2000-03-31· cited 13×
- In re Cincinnati Radiation LitigationS.D. Ohio· 1999-05-13· cited 12×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court· 1982-06-14· cited 4,068×
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court· 1974-05-28· cited 3,301×
- Blackie v. BarrackNinth Circuit· 1975-09-25· cited 871×
- 12 Fair empl.prac.cas. 451, 11 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 10,741 John Senter, Cross-Appellee v. General Motors Corporation, Cross-AppellantSixth Circuit· 1976-03-01· cited 628×
- Hankerson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court· 1976-10-04· cited 371×
- Shapero v. Kentucky Bar Assn.Supreme Court· 1988-06-13· cited 233×
- Day v. NLO, Inc.S.D. Ohio· 1992-06-22· cited 62×
- Bowen v. General Motors Corp. AC Spark Plug DivisionN.D. Ohio· 1981-12-23· cited 19×
- Nelson v. United Credit Plan, Inc.E.D. Louisiana· 1978-01-05· cited 14×
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.