Biomedical Patent Management Corp. v. California

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a city council resolution is “unquestionably a matter of public record”
• noting that “inconsistency” in the judicial estoppel context “is excused by an intervening change in the law”
• finding that judicial estoppel did not preclude California Department of Health Services from waiving sovereign immunity in the first suit and asserting it in the 2006 case
• taking judicial notice of court filings from previous litigation between the parties as public records
• describing Lapides as involving “the same action,” Gunter as involving “one continuous action,” Vas-Cath as involving “a later phase of a continuous proceeding,” and Ramsey as involving “one continuous proceeding”
• stating that a waiver by litigation conduct must be clear

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).