Legal Opinion · Dissent

Gudz v. Jemrock Realty Co., LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 25, 2013Published

1Dissent

Moskowitz and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.,

dissent in a memorandum by Manzanet-Daniels, J, as follows: This appeal requires us to consider what constitutes a “penalty” for purposes of the class action statute, CPLR 901 (b), and whether a putative class representative may waive such penalty and still be deemed an adequate class representative.

CPLR 901 (b) expressly provides that “[u]nless a statute creating or imposing a penalty, or a minimum measure of recovery specifically authorizes the recovery thereof in a class action, an action to recover a penalty, or minimum measure of recovery created or…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Small v. Lorillard Tobacco Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1999
  2. Sperry v. Crompton Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2007
  3. Super Glue Corp. v. Avis Rent A Car System, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
  4. Pludeman v. Northern Leasing Systems, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  5. Drucker v. MauroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API