Curley v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, as is the case here, plaintiff’s unjust enrichment claim was subject to the same three-year limitations period as his breach of contract claim
• remanding agency decision because it failed to set forth specific findings of fact to support its conclusion
• declining to review constitutional argument in petition for writ of certiorari that was not raised below
• enforcing agreement evinced by letter accepting offer, even though it “explicitly stated that an agreement would be drawn u p ”
• commencing limitations period on claim for excessive attorneys’ fees at point plaintiffs demanded refund
• deferring to agency if its decision comports with the express statutory language

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).