Rose Dionne, Etc. v. Gerard Bouley, Etc., Rose Dionne, Etc. v. Gerard Bouley, Etc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing discretion of federal courts to “deny Rule 23(b)(2) certification where it is a formality or otherwise inappropriate” but emphasizing need for attention to “situations where a class certification under Rule 23(b)(2
• affirming, as modified, injunction prohibiting state court clerk from issuing writs of attachment under constitutionally deficient procedures
• “[I]t is perfectly consistent with Mathews not to require notice or hearing 14 before a post-judgment attachment
• “[Endicott-Johnson’s ] expansive language is no longer the law given the more recent Supreme Court precedent in the area of property sequestrations and due process.”
• “[T]he debtor must receive and be notified of a timely opportunity to challenge any sequestration of his property which the law makes unattachable.”
• debtor entitled to procedural safeguards that can be afforded without undermining creditor's adjudicated rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).