Legal Opinion
In re Workers' Compensation
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided March 20, 1990No. Civ. No. 4-85-1166PublishedCited by 71 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROSENBAUM, District Judge.
Plaintiffs move for class certification pursuant to Rule 23, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (Fed.R.Civ.P.). Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of:
All employers (excluding defendants and co-conspirators, including any subsidiary or affiliate thereof) with places of business within the State of Minnesota required by Minnesota law to carry workers’ compensation insurance coverage, who between June 8, 1979, and April 25, 1983 purchased policies of workers compensation insurance from one or more of the named defendants, including any subsidiary or affiliate thereof, or…
2Cases cited44 opinions
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Califano v. YamasakiSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- East Texas Motor Freight System, Inc. v. RodriguezSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by71 opinions
- In Re Visa Check/mastermoney Antitrust Litigation. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Limited, Inc., Sears Roebuck & Company, Safeway Inc., Circuit City Stores, Inc., National Retail Federation and the Food Marketing Institute, International Mass Retail Association, and All Similarly Situated Persons v. Visa U.S.A. Inc. And Mastercard International IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- In re Nasdaq Market-Makers Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Hamilton v. Ohio Savings BankOhio Supreme Court · 1998
- In re Potash Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1995
- In Re Catfish Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 1993
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.