Carlisle Ventures, Inc. v. Banco Espanol De Credito, S.A.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, because the defendant “does not respond to [the plaintiff’s] [contrary argument] in its Reply Brief,” the court should “decline to consider” such a response
• holding appellant waived argument where its reply brief failed to respond to opposing party's contrary assertions and did not otherwise point to any evidence disputing those assertions
• declining to consider an argument where the proponent failed to address opposing arguments in its reply
• declining to consider an appellant’s argument in part where the appellant “d[id] not respond to [the appellee’s] . . . argument in its [r]eply [b]rief”
• declining to consider claim because appellant failed to respond in reply brief to appellee's argument that it was waived
• finding district court’s decision insufficiently supported by Spanish law because expert and plaintiff “cite[ ] no cases or legal authority”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).