Herrera v. Churchill McGee, 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 “‘federal courts must give the agency’s factfinding the same preclusive effect to which it would be entitled in the State’s courts”’
• noting that a party’s “failure to avail himself of the full procedures provided by state law does not constitute a sign of their inadequacy” (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)
• noting that a party’s “failure to avail himself of the full procedures provided by state law does not constitute a sign of their inadequacy” (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)
• noting circuit split over the preclusive effect of unreviewed state administrative decisions and collecting cases
• intermediate appellate decisions are authoritative in Erie cases only to the extent that they accurately reflect state law
• federal courts interpret state law by applying the law of the state’s highest court and according weight to intermediate state appellate decisions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).