1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 263 F.3d
  5. 263 F.3d 394 (2001)
 

SMITH v. TEXACO, INC.

No. 00-40337.

263 F.3d 394 (2001)

Matthews SMITH; John Comeaux; John Lumpkins; Kenneth Ford; and Darlene Greene, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TEXACO, INC., et al., Defendants, Aramco Services Company; Saudi Refining, Inc.; Shell Oil Company; Star Enterprise; Texaco, Inc.; Texaco Refining and Marketing Incorporated; and Texaco Refining and Marketing East Inc., Defendants-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Revised October 25, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

James Erick Payne, John A. Cowan, Gregory M. Thompson (argued), Christopher T. Kirchmer, Provost & Umphrey, Beaumont, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellees.

Nancy J. Brown, Neil G. Martin, Nicole Perdue, Gardere Wynne Sewell, Houston, TX, for Aramco Services Co.

Christine E. Webber, Joseph M. Sellers, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, Washington, DC, for NAACP, United Food and Commercial Workers; Intern. Union, Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers Intern. Union, and National Employment Lawyers Ass'n, Amici Curiae.

Dewey J. Gonsoulin, Elizabeth Brandes Pratt, David B. Gaultney, Mehaffy & Weber, Beaumont, TX, for Saudi Refining, Inc.

John Michael Dorman, William John Bux, Locke Liddell & Sapp, L. Chris Butler, Shell Oil Co., Houston, TX, for Shell Oil Co.

V. Scott Kneese (argued), Amy K. Halevy, Bracewell & Patterson, Houston, TX, Robert J. Hambright, Orgain, Bell & Tucker, Beaumont, TX, for Star Enterprise.

Stephen F. Fink, Bryan Patrick Neal, Thompson & Knight, Dallas, TX, Joseph P. Moan, Texaco, Inc., White Plains, NY, Paul W. Gertz, Germer, Bernsen & Gertz, Beaumont, TX, Michael G. McQueeney, Texaco, Inc., Houston, TX, for Texaco, Inc., Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc., and Texaco Refining and Marketing East, Inc.

Before REAVLEY, SMITH and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge:

In this appeal brought pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 23(f), the defendants challenge a class certification. Concluding that the attempted class does not meet the requirements of the applicable rules, we reverse and remand.

I.

This case has its origins in race discrimination claims made against Texaco, Inc. ("Texaco"), and its subsidiaries in Roberts v. Texaco, Inc., 979 F.Supp. 185

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases