FLF, INC. v. World Publications, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the Court need not close its eyes to legal theories that are plainly without merit”
• reasoning that “the Court need not close its eyes to legal theories that are plainly without merit” when calculating amount-in-controversy
• “a claim for unjust enrichment may not be brought where the subject matter of the claim is covered by an express contract between the parties”
• “It is settled law in Maryland, and elsewhere, that a claim for unjust enrichment may not be brought where the subject matter of the claim is covered by an express contract between the parties.”
• “It is settled law in Maryland, and elsewhere, that a claim for unjust enrichment may not be brought where the subject matter of the claim is covered by an express contract between the parties.”
• “It is settled law in Maryland, and elsewhere, that a claim for unjust enrichment may not be brought where the subject matter of the claim is covered by an express contract between the parties.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).