Richardson v. Arizona Fuels Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court erred by insufficiently analyzing the class action certification requirements in rule 23
• holding “[t]he rule in Utah is that mismanagement of the corporation gives rise to a cause of action in the corporation, even if the mismanagement results in damage to stockholders”
• holding, among other things, that the district court committed reversible error by certifying a class action when \neither the memorandum decision nor the order of the district court does any more than recite that the suit may be maintained as a class action\
• “in Utah it is clear that [a fiduciary] relation is to the stockholders collectively ”
• \It is the duty of the district court to apply carefully the criteria set forth in Rule 23(a) and (b) to the facts of the case to determine whether an action may be maintained as a class action.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).