Adams Express Co. v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that complaint did not meet Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading requirements where plaintiff did not allege, among other things “the time, the place, or the person making the misrepresentation”
• dismissing claim for failure to meet Civil Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading requirements, in part by failing to identify “which section of the MCPA Defendants allegedly violated”
• dismissing MCPA claim for not satisfying Civil Rule 9(b)’s heightened pleading standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).