Pigford v. Veneman

How courts have described this case

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

• movants \must demonstrate separate standing-personal and individual injury to them as a result of class counsel's conduct-in order to pursue\ their claim to disqualify class counsel
• movants \must demonstrate separate standing – personal and individual injury to them as a result of class counsel's conduct – in order to pursue\ their claim to disqualify class counsel
• publication in newspapers or periodicals is sufficient to notify potential class members
• publication in newspapers or periodicals is sufficient to notify potential class members
• denying motion to disqualify for lack of standing
• denying motion to disqualify for lack of standing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Dehoyos v. Allstate Corp.
  W.D. Texas· 2007-02-21· cited 47×
• United Mutual Houses, L.P. v. Andujar
  S.D. New York· 2002-07-08· cited 28×
• Estate of Klieman v. Palestinian Authority
  District of Columbia· 2006-03-30· cited 20×
• Timothy Pigford v. Thomas Vilsack
  D.C. Circuit· 2015-02-06· cited 9×
• Ambush v. Engelberg
  D.C. Circuit· 2017-10-10· cited 6×
• In Re New Motor Vehicles Canadian Export Antitrust Litigation
  D. Maine· 2006-12-18· cited 2×
• ['Brown v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.']
  District of Columbia· 2014-03-18· cited 2×
• White v. Vilsack
  District of Columbia· 2015-02-19· cited 2×
• Pigford v. Veneman
  District of Columbia· 2016-09-15
• Ambush v. Engelberg
  District of Columbia· 2017-10-10
• Parker v. United States Department of Agriculture
  District of Columbia· 2019-09-11
• In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation
  District of Columbia· 2012-01-13
• Black Lives Matter D.C. v. Trump
  District of Columbia· 2025-03-14