| dbo:abstract |
Frank v. Gaos, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), was a per curiam decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in a case concerning the practice of cy pres settlements in class action lawsuits. Following oral argument, the court asked the parties to submit supplemental briefs addressing whether the parties had Article III standing to pursue the case in federal courts. Supplemental briefing was completed on December 21, 2018. On March 20, 2019, the court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. (en) |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink |
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-961/ https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4177620/in-re-google-referrer-header-privacy-litigation/ https://www.leagle.com/decision/infco20170822167 https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20150403681 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-961 http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/frank-v-gaos/ https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/historical/460/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-961_j42k.pdf |
| dbo:wikiPageID |
57797275 (xsd:integer) |
| dbo:wikiPageLength |
15221 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger) |
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID |
1084496143 (xsd:integer) |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink |
dbr:Amicus_curiae dbc:2019_in_United_States_case_law dbr:F._Supp._3d dbr:Procedures_of_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbc:Google_litigation dbr:Cy-près_doctrine dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:Competitive_Enterprise_Institute dbr:SCOTUSblog dbr:Class_action dbc:United_States_civil_due_process_case_law dbr:Federal_Rules_of_Civil_Procedure dbr:Cato_Institute dbr:Center_for_Individual_Rights dbr:Header_(computing) dbr:9th_Cir. dbc:United_States_privacy_case_law dbr:Forbes dbr:Ted_Frank dbc:United_States_class_action_case_law dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States dbr:Spokeo,_Inc._v._Robins dbc:Competitive_Enterprise_Institute dbr:Case_or_Controversy_Clause dbr:Certiorari dbr:Writ_of_certiorari dbr:Settlement_(litigation) dbr:Per_curiam dbr:N.D._Cal. dbr:F.3d |
| dbp:arguedate |
0001-10-31 (xsd:gMonthDay) |
| dbp:argueyear |
2018 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:case |
Frank v. Gaos, No. 17-961, 586 U.S. ___ (en) |
| dbp:decidedate |
0001-03-20 (xsd:gMonthDay) |
| dbp:decideyear |
2019 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:dissent |
Thomas (en) |
| dbp:docket |
17 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:fullname |
Theodore H. Frank, et al. v. Paloma Gaos, et al. (en) |
| dbp:holding |
The case is remanded for the courts below to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins (en) |
| dbp:justia |
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/586/17-961/ |
| dbp:litigants |
Frank v. Gaos (en) |
| dbp:otherSource |
Supreme Court (en) |
| dbp:otherUrl |
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-961_j42k.pdf |
| dbp:oyez |
https://www.oyez.org/cases/2018/17-961 |
| dbp:parallelcitations |
172800.0 (dbd:second) |
| dbp:percuriam |
Yes (en) |
| dbp:prior |
25920.0 (dbd:second) |
| dbp:uspage |
___ (en) |
| dbp:usvol |
586 (xsd:integer) |
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate |
dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Efn dbt:Further dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Notelist dbt:Quote dbt:Reflist dbt:Update dbt:Google_litigation |
| dct:subject |
dbc:2019_in_United_States_case_law dbc:Google_litigation dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbc:United_States_civil_due_process_case_law dbc:United_States_privacy_case_law dbc:United_States_class_action_case_law dbc:Competitive_Enterprise_Institute |
| rdf:type |
owl:Thing dbo:Case dbo:LegalCase dbo:UnitOfWork wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase |
| rdfs:comment |
Frank v. Gaos, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), was a per curiam decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in a case concerning the practice of cy pres settlements in class action lawsuits. Following oral argument, the court asked the parties to submit supplemental briefs addressing whether the parties had Article III standing to pursue the case in federal courts. Supplemental briefing was completed on December 21, 2018. On March 20, 2019, the court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. (en) |
| rdfs:label |
Frank v. Gaos (en) |
| owl:sameAs |
wikidata:Frank v. Gaos https://global.dbpedia.org/id/5ht8N |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom |
wikipedia-en:Frank_v._Gaos?oldid=1084496143&ns=0 |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf |
wikipedia-en:Frank_v._Gaos |
| foaf:name |
(en) Theodore H. Frank, et al. v. Paloma Gaos, et al. (en) |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects of |
dbr:Frank_v_Gaos |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of |
dbr:Cy-près_doctrine dbr:Frank_v_Gaos dbr:Ted_Frank |
| is foaf:primaryTopic of |
wikipedia-en:Frank_v._Gaos |
