Adams Express Co. v. Hines

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the theft of intangible property generally cannot support a claim for conversion
• concluding that the theft of intangible property generally cannot support a claim for conversion
• concluding, after the plaintiff failed to specify the location of events in her complaint, that application of Massachusetts law was appropriate
• addressing the relationship between breach of contract, promissory estoppel, and unjust enrichment claims under Massachusetts law in a ruling on the defendants’ motion to dismiss

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).