Axelrod v. Saks & Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LUONGO, District Judge.
These three antitrust actions, which are consolidated for all purposes by the accompanying order, are before me on the plaintiffs’ motion for class action certification. Fed.R.Civ.P. 23. The defendants vigorously oppose certification on a variety of grounds. For the reasons set out in this opinion, I conclude that certification under Rule 23(b)(3) is proper.
The Axelrod complaint, filed on December 10, 1976, and amended on February 4, 1977, names as defendants the corporations that operate three department stores — Saks Fifth Avenue, Bergdorf Goodman, and Bonwit…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Sosna v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- 9 Fair empl.prac.cas. 211, 9 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 9931 Sandra Wetzel and Mari Ross, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated, Equal Opportunity Commission as Amicus Curiae v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- Great Lakes Rubber Corporation v. Herbert Cooper Co., IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1961
- Revere Copper and Brass Incorporated v. The Aetna Casualty and Surety Company, and Third-Party v. George A. Fuller Company, Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
- Chevalier v. Baird Savings Ass'nDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In re Asbestos School LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- In re Arthur Treacher's Franchisee LitigationDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
- In re Flat Glass Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1999
- Wolgin v. Magic Marker Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- Hedges Enterprises, Inc. v. Continental Group, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.