Comcast Corp. v. Behrend

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 5, 2012 Decided March 27, 2013
Full case name	Comcast Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Caroline Behrend, et al.
Docket no.	11-864
Citations	569 U.S. 27 ( more ) 133 S. Ct. 1426; 185 L. Ed. 2d 515; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 2544, 81 U.S.L.W. 4217
Opinion announcement	Opinion announcement
Case history
Prior	Decision against defendant, 264 F.R.D. 150 (E.D. Pa. 2010); affirmed, 655 F.3d 182 (3d Cir. 2011); rehearing en banc denied, unreported; certiorari granted, 567 U.S. 933(2012).
Holding
Courts certifying classes must thoroughly vet prospective classes for all four requirements even if the court's analysis touches on the merits of the claim.
Court membership
Chief Justice John Roberts Associate Justices Antonin Scalia  · Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas  · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer  · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor  · Elena Kagan
Case opinions
Majority	Scalia, joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito
Dissent	Ginsburg and Breyer, joined by Sotomayor, Kagan
Laws applied
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)

Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that courts certifying classes must thoroughly vet prospective classes for all four requirements even if the court's analysis touches on the merits of the claim. ^[1] The case restricted class certifications. The votes were split upon typical ideological lines, but, in an unusual move, the dissent was jointly written by two justices. ^[2]

References

1. Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013).
2. Campos, Sergio (March 29, 2013). "Opinion analysis: No common ground". SCOTUSblog. Retrieved October 14, 2025.

External links

• Text of Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27(2013) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)