Clark v. Feder Semo and Bard, P.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[The plaintiff] candidly admitted that she did not rely on [the SPD] for any information. That alone would not be enough to preclude recovery, but it certainly does not help her case.”
• “The' Court reviews the evidence under the ‘default rule for civil cases,’ the ‘preponderance of the evidence’- standard.” (quoting Cigna Corp. v. Amara, 563 U.S. 421, 444, 131 S.Ct. 1866, 179 L.Ed.2d 843 (2011))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).