United States v. Kreuter

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that prospective class members are capable of identifying themselves based on the dates of their incarceration included in the class definition
• finding typicality was satisfied because all injuries of all named plaintiffs arose from the same conduct, despite the fact that the injuries themselves were not identical as the lengths of each individuals’ detention varied
• “[S]ending notices to the last known address for each . . . member of the class, and whose current address cannot be identified through reasonable efforts (e.g., Internet searches), will satisfy the ‘individual notice’ requirement of the Rule”
• “[T]he legal standard is whether the evidence presented by plaintiffs establishes a ‘reasonable basis for crediting [plaintiffs’] assertion[s].’ ”
• “[A]n individual would be able to determine, simply by reading the definition, whether he or she was a member of the proposed class.”
• “Generally speaking, courts have found that a proposed class consisting of at least forty members will satisfy the impracticability requirement.” (collecting cases)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).