Rollins v. Boles

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, in antitrust cases, individual damages “are likely to be too small to justify litigation, but a class action would offer those with small claims the opportunity for meaningful redress”
• denying motion to strike modified class definitions where, in addition to requiring no additional discovery and causing no prejudice, the proposed modifications were “minor”
• denying motion to strike modified class definitions where, in addition to requiring no additional discovery and causing no prejudice, the proposed modifications were “minor”
• finding no need for an amended complaint where the proposed modifications to the class for class certification purposes 28 were “minor, require no additional discovery, and cause no prejudice to defendants.”
• “[I]f common questions are found to predominate in an antitrust action ... the superiority prerequisite of Rule 23(b)(3) is satisfied.”
• “The typicality requirement does not mandate that the products purchased . . . be 12 the same as those of absent class members.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).