Midwest Emery Freight System, Inc. v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a 'district court will strike class allegations without permitting discovery or waiting for a certification motion where the complaint and any affidavits clearly demonstrate that the plaintiff cannot meet the requirements for a class action'
• contending that Federal “Rule 23 is the antithesis of § 216(b).”
• stating in a footnote that requiring “that an employee opt-out of a hybrid action to preserve his FLSA claim is contrary to the letter and spirit of § 216(b)”
• describing the differences between an FLSA collective action and a Rule 23 class action
• noting in a footnote that “the requirement that an employee opt out of a hybrid action to preserve the employee's FLSA claim is contrary to the letter and spirit of § 216(b).”
• “These irreconcilable schemes have divergent consequences, such as the size of the respective classes and the binding effect of judgments.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).