“Comcast Corp. v. Behrend”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

词条

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

释义

References
External links

{{Infobox SCOTUS case
|Litigants=Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
|ArgueDate=November 5
|ArgueYear=2012
|DecideDate=March 27
|DecideYear=2013
|FullName=Comcast Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Caroline Behrend, et al.
|USVol=569
|USPage=27
|ParallelCitations=133 S. Ct. 1426; 185 L. Ed. 2d 515; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 2544, 81 U.S.L.W. 4217
|Docket=11-864
|Prior=Decision against defendant, 264 F.R.D. 150 (E.D. Pa. 2010); affirmed, 655 F.3d 182 (3d Cir. 2011); rehearing en banc denied, unreported; certiorari granted, {{ussc|567|933|2012|el=no}}.
|OpinionAnnouncement=https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-864_k537.pdf
|Subsequent=
|Holding=Respondents’ class action was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(3).
|SCOTUS=2010-2016
|Majority=Scalia
|JoinMajority=Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito
|Dissent=Ginsburg and Breyer
|JoinDissent=Sotomayor, Kagan
|LawsApplied=Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)
}}

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with class certification under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.^[1] The case restricted class certifications. The votes were split upon typical ideological lines, but, in an unusual move, the dissent was jointly written by two justices.

References

1. ^{{ussc|name=Comcast Corp. v. Behrend|volume=569|page=27|pin=|year=2013}}.

External links

{{caselaw source

| case = Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, {{Ussc|569|27|2013|el=no}}
| courtlistener =https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/856346/comcast-corp-v-behrend/
| googlescholar = https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3800073153079484665
| justia =https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/569/27/
| oyez =https://www.oyez.org/cases/2012/11-864
| other_source1 = Supreme Court (slip opinion)
| other_url1 =https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/11-864_k537.pdf{{Comcast}}{{SCOTUS-stub}}

随便看

开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。