Opinion

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. United States District Court

  • 523 F.2d 1083
  • 20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 11
  • 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 14531
Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Filed
May 27, 1975
Status
Published
On the bench
Chambers, Consideration, Disposition, Ely, Hufstedler, Kennedy, Schnacke, Suggestion, Wallace, Wright
Cited by
26 cases

mere possibility of inconsistent results and inconsistent resolution of same question of law does not establish incompatible standards of conduct under 23(b)(1)(A); nor does complexity and expense of litigation justify a 23(b)(1)(B) class

How later courts described this case

  • mere possibility of inconsistent results and inconsistent resolution of same question of law does not establish incompatible standards of conduct under 23(b)(1)(A); nor does complexity and expense of litigation justify a 23(b)(1)(B) class

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

ON SUGGESTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

The full court has been advised of the suggestion for an en banc hearing. An active judge called for an en banc vote and a majority of the judges of the court has voted to reject the suggestion for rehearing en banc. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).

Judge Ely did not participate in the consideration or disposition of the suggestion for en banc rehearing.

The suggestion for rehearing en banc is rejected.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.