# Charles E. Wagner, for Himself and Others Similarly Situated v. Reese H. Taylor, Jr., Chairman, Interstate Commerce Commission

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · December 24, 1987 · 836 F.2d 578

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9477095

## Case

- **Full name:** Charles E. WAGNER, for Himself and Others Similarly Situated, Appellant, v. Reese H. TAYLOR, Jr., Chairman, Interstate Commerce Commission
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** December 24, 1987
- **Citations:** 836 F.2d 578; 266 U.S. App. D.C. 414; 9 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1055; 45 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 37,631; 45 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1199; 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 16758; 1987 WL 28876
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Starr
- **Judges:** III, Robinson, Starr, Bryant
- **Cited by:** 103 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9477095

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that the district court had "expressly rejected the motion [for a preliminary injunction] 'in light of' its contemporaneous denial of class certification," and concluding that "[w]ithout review of the determination on class certification, effective review of the order …
- finding that the district court had "expressly rejected the motion [for a preliminary injunction] 'in light of its contemporaneous denial of class certification,” and concluding that "[w]ithout review of the determination on class certification, effective review of the order o…
- stating that district courts may “exercise . . . broad discretion to redefine and reshape the proposed class to the point that it qualifies for certification under Rule 23”
- noting that “a decision on class certification cannot be made in a vacuum,” and that “some inspection of the circumstances of the case is essential to determine whether the prerequisites of Federal Civil Rule 23 have been met”

## Opinion text

STARR, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I am in agreement with much of Judge Robinson’s scholarly opinion and in full accord with the judgment of my colleagues that the District Court did not err in declining Mr. Wagner’s invitation to certify this action as a class action. As the panel today once again recognizes, the judges of our District Court are uniquely well situated to resolve the difficult issues appertaining to class certifications. Although I am not entirely persuaded, as are my colleagues, that Mr. Wagner’s claims satisfy the requirement of typicality, I am in agreement that the District Court correctly discerned that other failings fatally infected Mr. Wagner’s position. That being so, I find it unnecessary to come finally to rest with respect to the nettlesome questions posed by the issue of typicality vel non and content myself with expressing my accord with the court’s judgment and its excellent opinion on each of the other facets of this factually rich case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9477095. Public record. Not legal advice.