Skip to main content
· 12/23/1986

Robert L. Glidden v. Chromalloy American Corporation and Allied Products Corporation

Citations

  • 808 F.2d 621
  • 6 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 910
  • 8 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1114
  • 1986 U.S. App. LEXIS 35088

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that absent class members may learn of and rely on a suit even though the class has not yet been certified; running of statute of limitations could therefore be a concern
  • \The 'intent' of the district judge is accordingly irrelevant.\
  • “[w]hen a court resolves a case on the Khan v. Jewish Women International merits without discussing its jurisdiction to act, it does not establish a precedent requiring similar treatment of other cases once the jurisdictional problem has come to light”
  • “The ‘intent’ of the district judge is accordingly irrelevant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Posner, Coffey, Easterbrook

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.