Kaplan v. Pomerantz
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
132 F.R.D. 504 (1990)
- Written by Mary Phelan D'Isa, JD
Facts
The defendants in a securities-fraud class-action lawsuit filed a motion to decertify Kaplan (plaintiff), the plaintiff-class representative, who was also the administrator of his deceased wife’s estate. Kaplan’s wife had purchased some securities that were the subject of the lawsuit. The defendants alleged that because Kaplan lied in depositions about his involvement in other lawsuits and his wife’s ownership of other stock, Kaplan lacked credibility and could not adequately represent the class. Kaplan argued that the subject of his lies had marginal relevance to the lawsuit and that the class-certification requirement that the class be adequately represented considers only two factors: (1) the experience of the plaintiffs’ legal counsel; and (2) the representative’s lack of interests that would be antagonistic to the class—which does not include the representative’s credibility.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rovner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 824,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
