|Comcast Corp. v. Behrend|
|Argued November 5, 2012
Decided March 27, 2013
|Full case name||Comcast Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Caroline Behrend, et al.|
|Citations||569 U.S. ___ (more)|
|Opinion announcement||Opinion announcement|
|Prior history||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, 567 U. S. ___ (2012)|
|Respondents' class action was improperly certified under Rule 23(b)(3).|
|Majority||Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito|
|Dissent||Ginsburg and Breyer, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan|
|Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)|
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. ___ (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with class certification under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 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.
Manage research, learning and skills at defaultLogic. Create an account using LinkedIn or facebook to manage and organize your Digital Marketing and Technology knowledge. defaultLogic works like a shopping cart for information -- helping you to save, discuss and share.