Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Stewart Smith Intermediaries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming dismissal of amended complaint with prejudice where “amended complaint was only slightly less prolix than its predecessor and equally defective in stating a claim”
• affirming dismissal of amended complaint with prejudice where \amended complaint was only slightly less prolix than its predecessor and equally defective in stating a claim\
• affirming the dismissal of an amended complaint with prejudice when it “was only slightly less prolix than its predecessor and equally defective in stating a claim.”
• “[B]reach of fiduciary duty is not a tort; rather, it is controlled by the substantive laws of agency, contract and equity.”
• “[B]reach of fiduciary duty is not a tort; rather, it is controlled by the substantive laws of agency, contract and equity.”
• “[t]he allegation that defendant was Capitol’s agent is, by itself, a mere legal conclusion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).