ALEX FINCH D/B/A FINCH LAW FIRM, AND FROMANG AND FINCH, P.A. v. AUTO CLUB INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, BRESSLER, AMERY & ROSS, P.C., LINDA MICHELLE BERNS MASSEY

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the objective prong is a “single backwards-looking inquiry” that asks whether a reasonable litigant could have expected to succeed in light of the entire record generated in the infringement proceedings
• employing the “subjective bad faith” and “objectively baseless” standard only “absent misconduct in the course of the litigation ”
• explaining that subjective bad faith can be established by showing that the “lack of objective foundation for the claim was either known or so obvious that it should have been known by the party asserting the claim” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Because we con- clude that Allcare’s allegations of infringement of claim 52 were not objectively baseless, we need not reach the question of whether Allcare acted in subjective bad faith.”
• “We review factual findings as to subjective bad faith for clear error.”
• requiring proof of both objective baselessness and subjective bad faith

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).