M.D. North Carolina· 1/14/1993
Simpson v. Specialty Retail Concepts
Citations
- 149 F.R.D. 94
- 1993 WL 198839
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “Generally, to satisfy Rule 23(a)(4), (1) counsel must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation; and (2
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tilley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
14 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Krogman v. SterrittN.D. Texas· 2001-03-29· cited 74×
- Weikel v. Tower Semiconductor Ltd.D. New Jersey· 1998-10-20· cited 40×
- Hensley v. Haynes Trucking, LLCMissouri Court of Appeals· 2018-06-14· cited 32×
- Freedman v. Louisiana-Pacific Corp.D. Oregon· 1996-02-14· cited 31×
- In Re Scientific-Atlanta, Inc. Securities LitigationN.D. Georgia· 2007-09-07· cited 26×
- In re Intelcom Group, Inc. Securities LitigationD. Colorado· 1996-10-10· cited 24×
- Kalodner v. Michaels Stores, Inc.N.D. Texas· 1997-03-21· cited 17×
- In re Southeast Hotel Properties Ltd. Partnership Investor LitigationW.D. North Carolina· 1993-10-26· cited 16×
- Morris v. Wachovia Securities, Inc.E.D. Virginia· 2004-07-28· cited 15×
- Burstein v. Applied Extrusion Technologies, Inc.D. Massachusetts· 1994-03-08· cited 7×
- Burgio v. Protected Vehicles, Inc. (In Re Protected Vehicles, Inc.)D. South Carolina· 2008-11-21· cited 6×
- City of Ann Arbor Employees' Retirement System v. Sonoco Products Co.D. South Carolina· 2010-09-30· cited 6×
- Harris v. Sand Canyon Corp.D. South Carolina· 2010-07-22· cited 3×
- In re Red Hat, Inc. Securities LitigationE.D. North Carolina· 2009-08-28· cited 1×
Cites
24 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Basic Inc. v. LevinsonSupreme Court· 1988-03-07· cited 3,007×
- Blackie v. BarrackNinth Circuit· 1975-09-25· cited 871×
- Eisenberg v. GagnonThird Circuit· 1985-06-28· cited 452×
- Green v. Wolf Corp.Second Circuit· 1968-12-09· cited 440×
- Alexander Kahan, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Lewis RosenstielThird Circuit· 1970-06-08· cited 418×
- Hankerson v. North CarolinaSupreme Court· 1976-10-04· cited 371×
- In Re Data Access Systems Securities Litigation. Appeal of Tolins & Lowenfels & Roger A. Tolins. Appeal of I. Kahlowsky and Co. And Peter CunicelliThird Circuit· 1988-04-08· cited 218×
- Jesse Adams v. Director, OwcpSixth Circuit· 1989-09-29· cited 141×
- Vitiello v. CicconiD. New Jersey· 1984-09-20· cited 94×
- Moskowitz v. LoppE.D. Pennsylvania· 1989-12-07· cited 71×
- Deary v. Guardian Loan Co., Inc.S.D. New York· 1982-03-02· cited 67×
- In Re ORFA Securities LitigationD. New Jersey· 1987-02-10· cited 55×
- In re Kirschner Medical Corp. Securities LitigationD. Maryland· 1991-07-26· cited 50×
- In Re MDC Holdings Securities LitigationS.D. California· 1990-12-12· cited 40×
- Gruber v. Price WaterhouseE.D. Pennsylvania· 1987-06-29· cited 36×
- Gavron v. Blinder Robinson & Co.E.D. Pennsylvania· 1987-04-16· cited 34×
- Hawk Industries, Inc. v. Bausch & Lome, Inc.S.D. New York· 1973-05-17· cited 32×
- In re Victor Technologies Securities LitigationN.D. California· 1984-04-04· cited 28×
- Ross v. Bank South, N.A.Eleventh Circuit· 1988-02-17· cited 26×
- Garfinkel v. Memory Metals, Inc.D. Connecticut· 1988-09-19· cited 25×
Other cases named Simpson v. Specialty Retail Concepts
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
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.