Capitol Hill Group C. Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the bankruptcy court did make a finding that Shaw Pittman was entitled to fees in part because the representation it provided was competent and professional”
• the court held res judicata was applicable where both ac tions relied on the same documents and involved the same analysis
• “[I]t is the facts surrounding the transaction or occurrence which operate to constitute the cause of action, not the legal theory upon which a litigant relies.”
• “[I]t is the facts surrounding the transaction or occurrence which operate to constitute the cause of action, not the legal theory upon which a litigant relies.”
• “[T]he 18 The absence of any discussion of the Fee Agreement in the malpractice dispute underscores this crucial distinction between (1) whether there was any factual overlap between the fee disputes and the malpractice claim and (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).