Case ID: so2d_926/html/0495-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "VICTORY, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Mark E. ANDREWS, On Behalf of Himself and others Similarly Situated v. TRANS UNION CORPORATION.
    No. 2005-C-2562.
    Supreme Court of Louisiana.
    April 17, 2006.
    
      VICTORY, J. Concurs in the Denial of the Writ and Assigns Reasons.
   VICTORY, J.,

concurring.

While I believe there may be some problems with the class definition adopted by the district court, my decision to concur in the denial of this writ is affected by the statement made by class counsel in its opposition to defendant’s writ to this court that it intends “upon remand, to request the trial court judge to modify the class definition, out of an abundance of caution, to ameliorate Judge Murray’s concerns.”