Named plaintiffs' differing interpretations of a form contract should not bar class certification, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in a suit against a Pennsylvania third-party energy supplier.
February 01, 2017 at 03:09 PM
1 minute read
Named plaintiffs’ differing interpretations of a form contract should not bar class certification, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled in a suit against a Pennsylvania third-party energy supplier.
The appeals court relied heavily on state contract law and guidance from other circuits for the conclusion that each individual signatory’s subjective understanding of a form contract should not be a consideration for a court in interpreting such a contract.
Presented by BigVoodoo
This event shines a spotlight on the individuals, teams, projects and organizations that are changing the financial industry.
BTI provides leading tax professionals from financial institutions with unmatched tools and resources.
Honoring outstanding legal achievements focused at the national level, largely around Big Law and in-house departments.
CORE RESPONSIBILITIES AND TASKS:(1) Tasks and responsibilities include:Reviewing and negotiating commercial agreements for internal business...
Boutique midtown Manhattan law firm specializing in sophisticated real estate litigation & representation of commercial and residential ...
Description: Fox Rothschild has an opening in the Boston, MA office for a Litigation Associate with 3 to 5 years of experience. The ideal ca...
