§

Marsha L. Harris, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

01994220 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 15, 2002)
Marsha L. Harris, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon

    457 U.S. 147 (1982)   Cited 5,846 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that named plaintiff must prove “much more than the validity of his own claim”; the individual plaintiff must show that “the individual's claim and the class claims will share common questions of law or fact and that the individual's claim will be typical of the class claims,” explicitly referencing the “commonality” and “typicality” requirements of Rule 23

  2. Gen. Tel. Co. v. EEOC

    446 U.S. 318 (1980)   Cited 1,433 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the EEOC's enforcement suits should not be considered representative actions subject to Rule 23"

  3. Zeidman v. J. Ray McDermott Co., Inc.

    651 F.2d 1030 (5th Cir. 1981)   Cited 431 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he controversy involved in this case is undoubtedly still live" in a putative securities class action because "[t]he classes which the plaintiffs seek to represent contain at least some number of persons who sold securities during the periods at issue"

  4. Harriss v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.

    74 F.R.D. 24 (N.D. Cal. 1977)   Cited 80 times
    Setting forth the requirements of commonality and typicality to maintain a class action claim involving unlawful employment practices

  5. Section 1614.204 - Class complaints

    29 C.F.R. § 1614.204   Cited 46 times
    Explaining that if an allegation was not previously discussed with the counselor, and the agent provides a satisfactory explanation for this omission, the "administrative judge shall refer the allegation to the agency for further counseling" before consolidating the allegation with the class complaint