Hesse v. Sprint Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
598 F.3d 581 · 2010
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 47 U.S.C. § 332
Relies on Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp. · Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co. v. Epstein · Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The claims underlying the Benney Settlement dealt exclusively with specific nationwide surcharges to recoup the costs of compliance with federal programs, whereas the claims at issue in the present case involve Sprint’s statewide surcharge to recoup the cost of the Washington B & O Tax allegedly in violation of a Washington statute. The superficial similarity between the two class actions is insufficient to justify the release of the later claims by the settlement of the former. Both involve claims that Sprint improperly billed govern ment taxes or fees to its customers, but they deal with different surcharges, imposed to recoup different costs, that were alleged to be improper for different reasons.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] settlement agreement may preclude a party from bringing a related claim in the future 'even though the claim was not presented and might not have been presentable in the class action,' but only where the released claim is 'based on the identical factual predicate as that underlying the claims in the settled class action.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“held that federal district courts properly released claims not alleged in the underlying complaint where those claims depended on the same set of facts as the claims that gave rise to the settlement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.