Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Expert Analysis

Whirlpool Case Is Instructive Of Rule 23(a) Requirements

Law360, New York (January 15, 2015, 12:08 PM EST) -- An Arkansas federal judge recently denied a motion to certify a proposed settlement class, finding that the movants failed to show that Rule 23(a) requirements for certification were met, specifically the prongs for numerosity and adequate representation. See Day v. Whirlpool Corp., No. 56 Case No. 2:13-cv-02164-PKH (W.D. Ark. Dec. 3, 2014). The opinion is an important reminder that the certification process for a settlement class is not a rubber stamp and reaffirms that district courts will undertake a rigorous analysis in deciding whether class certification is warranted, including looking beyond the pleadings....

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.


A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Related Sections

Law Firms

Companies

Government Agencies

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!