Legal Opinion
Woodard v. Andrus
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Decided December 30, 2010No. Civil Action No. 03-2098Published
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER AND REASONS
SARAH S. VANCE, District Judge.
Before the Court is plaintiffs’ motion for class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 Because plaintiffs have not met their burden of establishing that the proposed class meets the predominance and superiority requirements of that rule, plaintiffs’ motion is DENIED.
1. BACKGROUND
As the Court has issued a number of orders in this case, the background will be summarized only briefly.2 This case presents challenges to the fee-collection proce*188dures used by the clerks of court in Louisiana parishes. The clerks of…
2Cases cited46 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.