From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jordan, v. County of Los Angeles

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Feb 23, 1984
726 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1984)

Opinion

No. 79-3112.

February 23, 1984.

Alan Terakawa, Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee.

Walter Cochran-Bond, A. Thomas Hunt, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellant.

Before TANG, SCHROEDER and NELSON, Circuit Judges.


SECOND ORDER AMENDING OPINION

(Opinion, Aug. 18, 1983, 11 Cir. 1983. 713 F.2d 503).


The Order Amending Opinion filed January 19, 1984, is withdrawn.

The opinion filed August 18, 1983, is amended as follows:

After the fourth paragraph of the opinion, the following paragraph shall be inserted:

Falcon does not prohibit "across the board" class formation in every instance. See [ General Telephone Co. v.] Falcon [ 457 U.S. 147], 102 S.Ct. [2364] at 2371 n. 15 [72 L.Ed.2d 740] (Across the board actions aimed at a specific hiring practice are permissible under Rule 23). However, even though it would be permissible to form a class of all black applicants challenging a specified hiring practice, we must conclude after recomputation of the actual number of rejected black applicants, that such a class in the present case would still fail under the numerosity requirement of Rule 23.


Summaries of

Jordan, v. County of Los Angeles

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Feb 23, 1984
726 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1984)
Case details for

Jordan, v. County of Los Angeles

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES L. JORDAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Feb 23, 1984

Citations

726 F.2d 1366 (9th Cir. 1984)

Citing Cases

Sheehan v. Purolator, Inc.

To the contrary, both the Fifth and Ninth Circuits, in cases denying class certification, recognized that…

A. B. v. Haw. State Dep't of Educ.

Id. Plaintiffs contend that we should apply the standards for evaluating numerosity set forth in Jordan v.…