Cardenas v. City of Chicago

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that relevant factors under Rule 4(m) include the “harm to defendant’s ability to defend,” its “receipt of actual notice,” and “whether [the plaintiff] diligently pursued service during the allotted period”
• emphasizing that “the district court retained its discretion to hold the Plaintiffs accountable” for their “inaction” by “dismissing the case”
• emphasizing that \the district court retained its discretion to hold the Plaintiffs accountable\ for their \inaction\ by \dismissing the case\
• emphasizing that “the district court retained its discretion to hold the Plaintiffs accountable” for their “inaction” by “dismissing the case”
• emphasizing that \the district court retained its discretion to hold the Plaintiffs accountable\ for their \inaction\ by \dismissing the case\
• emphasizing that “the district court retained its discretion to hold the Plaintiffs accountable” for their “inaction” by “dismissing the case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).