Dempsey v. Sanders

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to find open-ended continuity where the alleged fraud had the “limited goal” of extracting money from plaintiff
• no open-ended continuity where “[t]he alleged fraud involved was designed to extract money from the Plaintiff. Given this limited goal, the scheme was inherently terminable.”
• no open-ended continuity where “[t]he alleged fraud involved was designed to extract money from the Plaintiff. Given this limited goal, the scheme was inherently terminable.”
• “{C]ourts have held that where a Plaintiff alleges a single scheme promulgated for the limited purpose of defrauding a single victim, continuity cannot be established.”
• “[C]ourts have held that where a Plaintiff alleges a single scheme promulgated for the limited purpose of defrauding a single victim, continuity cannot be established.”
• “[C]ourts have held that where a Plaintiff alleges a single scheme promulgated for the limited purpose of defrauding a single victim, continuity cannot be established.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).