Baker v. Daniel S. Berger, Ltd.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the individual’s signature on the face of the agreement was clear that he signed the agreement in his representative capacity on behalf of the corporation and therefore would not be personally bound
• holding that the individual's signature on the face of the agreement was clear that he signed the agreement in his representative capacity on behalf of the corporation and therefore would not be personally bound
• acknowledging that “the purpose of Rule 137 is not to penalize litigants because they were unsuccessful”
• acknowledging that “the purpose of Rule 137 is not to penalize litigants because they were unsuccessful”
• when allegations in complaint differ from those in attached exhibit, attached exhibit controls
• when allegations in complaint differ from those in attached exhibit, attached exhibit controls

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).