McComb v. Robertson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding plaintiffs demonstrated a means of proving impact on a class-wide basis despite defendants’ arguments regarding variations in products and pricing
• holding, in similar factual situation, that claims of each class member were “identical” to those of named plaintiff and that typicality requirement was therefore satisfied
• stating that commonality “is easily met because it may be fulfilled by a single common issue”
• certifying nationwide classes in case alleg- ing conspiracy to restrict output of linerboard
• “Numerosity does not require evidence of the exact number or identification of the proposed class.”
• “Numerosity does not require evidence of the exact number or identification of the proposed class.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).