Harris v. Stonecrest Care Auto Center, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that with “[t]he federal claim having been dismissed for want of jurisdiction,” the 26 Court could not “exercise supplemental jurisdiction to hear Mr. Harris’ state law claims” 27 dismissed the state law claims without prejudice
• finding that a plaintiff living “hundreds of miles” from the defendant premises is not considered in close proximity to the premises
• “[a]ll four factors, in varying degrees, weigh against finding Plaintiff 25 has standing in this case”
• reciting virtually the same factors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).