The Dial Corporation v. Carter
This text of 869 F.3d 13 (The Dial Corporation v. Carter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(f), the defendant-petitioner seeks leave from this court to appeal the district court’s grant of class certification in the underlying multi-district litigation. As an initial matter, the defendant-petitioner's motion for leave to file a reply is granted. The tendered reply is accepted for fíling and has been considered by the court. Having carefully considered the parties’ filings and relevant portions of the record, we conclude that the requirements for interlocutory review have not been met here. See Waste Mgmt. Holdings, Inc. v. Mowbray, 208 F.3d 288, 293-94 (1st Cir. 2000) (setting out factors to be considered when deciding whether to allow review pursuant to Rule 23(f)). Specifically, we conclude that the defendant-petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the district court’s Rule 23 analysis is sufficiently “questionable” to warrant immediate review. Id. at 293. Accordingly, the petition for leave to appeal is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
869 F.3d 13, 2017 WL 3225164, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 13870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-dial-corporation-v-carter-ca1-2017.