You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Luanna Scott v. Family Dollar Stores, Inc.

Citations: 743 F.3d 886; 2013 WL 7767704; 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 22961; 120 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1102Docket: 12-1610

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit; November 14, 2013; Federal Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in case No. 12-1610, denied a petition for panel rehearing filed by Family Dollar Stores, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit involving numerous plaintiffs. The court's decision was entered under the direction of Judge Gregory with Judge Keenan concurring. Circuit Judge Wilkinson dissented, advocating for the grant of the panel rehearing and emphasizing a prompt affirmation of the district court’s denial of class certification. He expressed concern that allowing discretion to 500 middle managers across the nation could undermine the principles established in the Supreme Court's Wal-Mart decision, suggesting that the majority's decision could significantly weaken the standards for class action litigation. Wilkinson indicated that the resolution of this issue is critical and should be addressed by the Supreme Court to prevent further complications in class action cases.

Legal Issues Addressed

Denial of Petition for Panel Rehearing

Application: The Fourth Circuit denied Family Dollar Stores, Inc.'s petition for panel rehearing in a class action lawsuit involving numerous plaintiffs.

Reasoning: The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, in case No. 12-1610, denied a petition for panel rehearing filed by Family Dollar Stores, Inc. regarding a class action lawsuit involving numerous plaintiffs.

Dissenting Opinion on Class Certification

Application: Circuit Judge Wilkinson dissented, advocating for the grant of the panel rehearing and emphasizing a prompt affirmation of the district court’s denial of class certification.

Reasoning: Circuit Judge Wilkinson dissented, advocating for the grant of the panel rehearing and emphasizing a prompt affirmation of the district court’s denial of class certification.

Interpretation of Supreme Court's Wal-Mart Decision

Application: Judge Wilkinson expressed concern that the majority's decision could undermine the principles established in the Supreme Court's Wal-Mart decision by allowing discretion to 500 middle managers.

Reasoning: He expressed concern that allowing discretion to 500 middle managers across the nation could undermine the principles established in the Supreme Court's Wal-Mart decision, suggesting that the majority's decision could significantly weaken the standards for class action litigation.

Need for Supreme Court Review

Application: Judge Wilkinson indicated that the resolution of issues related to class certification standards is critical and should be addressed by the Supreme Court to prevent further complications.

Reasoning: Wilkinson indicated that the resolution of this issue is critical and should be addressed by the Supreme Court to prevent further complications in class action cases.