Robert Stewart v. Lynne Abraham

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “if the named plaintiff demonstrates that the potential number of plaintiffs exceeds 40, the first prong of Rule 23(a) has been met.”
• finding that the numerosity requirement will generally be satisfied “if the named plaintiff demonstrates that the potential number of plaintiffs exceeds 40.”
• stating in dicta, “No minimum number of plaintiffs is required to maintain a suit as a class action, but generally if the named plaintiff demonstrates that the potential number of plaintiffs exceeds 40, the first prong of Rule 23(a) has been met.”
• “No minimum number of plaintiffs is required to maintain a suit as a class action....”
• “No minimum number of plaintiffs is required to maintain a suit as a class action . . . .”
• “[when] the potential number of plaintiffs exceeds 40, the first prong of Rule 23(a) has been met.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).