Chemung Canal Trust Co. ex rel. Fairway Spring Co. v. Sovran Bank/Maryland

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “continued threats” to collect upon a debt and foreclosure were insufficient to support an IIED claim
• dismissing count in complaint captioned “Injunctive Relief” because “[a]n injunction is not a cause of action, but a remedy”; noting, however, that “injunctive relief may be available if [plaintiff] succeeds on the merits of his remaining claims”
• dismissing count in complaint captioned “Injunctive Relief” because “[a]n injunction is not a cause of action, but a remedy”; noting, however, that “injunctive relief may be available if [plaintiff] succeeds on the merits of his remaining claims”
• continued threats to collect upon and enforce a legally enforceable debt, including threatened home foreclosure, insufficient to state a claim of IIED
• “An injunction is not a cause of action, but a remedy.”
• “non-PSA-compliant” transaction is typically “voidable,” rather than “void” under New York law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).