Coffee v. Lewis

How courts have described this case

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

• finding joinder inappropriate in the copyright infringement context where the alleged infringement “was committed by unrelated defendants, through independent actions, at different times and locations”
• exercising this Court’s discretionary authority under Rule 20(b) to sever defendants when joinder is “inefficient, raises significant manageability problems, and is unduly prejudicial to the defendants”
• “[T]he risk of extortionate settlement is too great to ignore, especially when joinder is being used to that end.”
• “the undue burden contemplated by Rule 45 is one placed on the direct recipient of the subpoena. . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).