David Grochocinski v. Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw, LLP

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “judicial estoppel is concerned more generally with protecting the integrity of the courts from the appearance and reality of manipulative litigation conduct”
• upholding denial of motion to intervene filed two-and-a-half years after person should have realized that his interest was at issue
• denying intervention where the potential intervenor “could have missed the implications for his [interests] only if he was willfully blind to them”
• affirming the denial of a motion to intervene as untimely because the movant knew the district court granted discovery on the defense but did not move to intervene until after the court granted summary judgment
• affirming the denial of a motion to intervene as untimely because the movant knew the district court granted discovery on the defense but did not move to intervene until after the court granted summary judgment
• affirming the denial of a motion to intervene as untimely because the movant knew the district court granted discovery on the defense but did not move to intervene until after the court granted summary judgment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).