Case Citator › General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon

General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Criticized by some courts
Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Citation
457 U.S. 147
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
173 of 173
Citing cases (total)
4,065
Treatment dates
2017
Criticized by some courts
At least one reviewed court has criticized this case’s reasoning. No reviewed court has overruled it. General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon was criticized on a narrow question about standing in a class action. A federal district court described its treatment of differences between a representative's claims and the class's claims as an earlier approach that gave way to later Supreme Court standing decisions.
More on how this was screened

That confirmed criticism is listed below. All 173 flagged citations have been read; the other opinions did not adversely treat Falcon's Rule 23 class-certification holding.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

4,065 later cases cite General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon; 173 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Criticized

  • The court criticized Falcon's treatment of a mismatch between a class representative's claims and the requested class relief as a Rule 23 adequacy issue, and instead applied later Supreme Court standing decisions.

    In re Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. Securities Litigation · S.D. Tex. · filed

    Although the plaintiffs did not raise the argument, this court is unpersuaded that the existence of some stray Supreme Court cases that treat variance between the class representative’s personal claims and the relief sought on behalf of the class as a class certification problem implicating Rule 23 adequacy issues rather than standing, e.g., Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 102 S.Ct. 2364, 72 L.Ed.2d 740 (1982); Sosna v. Iowa, 419 U.S. 393, 95 S.Ct. 553, 42 L.Ed.2d 532 (1975), has any bearing on the correct analysis. Those opinions predate Blum and Lewis, which do treat the variance problem as a standing issue, and this court will follow the Supreme Court’s more recent pronouncements on the subject.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace