Legal Opinion
Whittington v. United States
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided August 4, 2006No. CIV.A. H-03-4507PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum and Order
MILLER, District Judge.
Pending before the court is the government’s Opposed Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply (Dkt.# 55) and the plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (Dkt.# 45). The government’s motion for leave is GRANTED. After considering the parties’ arguments and the applicable law, the court is of the opinion that the plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification should be DENIED.
Factual and Procedural Background
In the 1980’s, the plaintiffs invested in farming entities in the form of limited partnerships organized by American Agri-Corp (“AMCOR”). Plaintiff H.G.…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the WarSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Flora v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Robert D. Sprague, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. General Motors Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Slattery v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- Prestop Holdings, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2010
- BAUTISTA-PEREZ v. HolderDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2009
- Jonathan Corrente, Charles Shaw, and Leo Williams v. The Charles Schwab CorporationDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 2025