Freeman v. Joiner

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that, under former Rule 56(f), a district court may deny a request for further discovery if 21 the movant has failed to pursue discovery in the past
• construing policy language providing that “[i]f ... the insured[ ] shall become aware of any occurrence which may subsequently give rise to a claim being made,” to mean that insured had to give notice of anything it considered to be a potential claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).