Creative Consumer Concepts, Inc. v. Kreisler

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a stay is required if a party shows substantial prejudice to his civil rights in the absence of a stay
• observing that stay of civil matter pending conclusion of criminal proceedings might be warranted “to prevent either party from taking advantage of broader civil discovery rights”
• holding that a district court did not err by allowing a party to supplement its brief and present evidence of an affirmative defense because the opposing party “had notice of the defense ... and, therefore, suffered no prejudice from [the] failure to comply with Rule 8(c)”
• explaining that a plaintiff does not suffer prejudice when she has notice the defendant will raise an affirmative defense at trial, and thus the defendant’s failure to comply with Rule 8(c) is not fatal
• reviewing a district court’s decision on a motion to stay for an abuse of discretion
• affirming district court’s denial of stay where “there was limited overlap between the issues and evidence in the civil and criminal case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).