in Re Zak Nakhoda, James Wesselski, Kenneth Chambers, Philip Spotts, the Structural Alliance, Wesgroup Consulting, LLC, and the Mission Group

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that statements in affidavits that amount to legal conclusions or statements made without personal knowledge are not capable of being presented in a form that would admissible in evidence
• holding that statements in affidavits that amount to legal conclusions or statements made without personal knowledge are not capable of being presented in a form that would admissible in evidence
• evaluating a district court’s decision on whether to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims under a highly deferential abuse-of-discretion standard
• approving supplemental jurisdiction over an employer’s counterclaims, including breach of fiduciary duty, against an employee’s husband because those counterclaims operated as a defense to the employee’s claim
• district court erred by “failing to state the reasons for granting summary judgment . . . as is required by Rule 56(a)”
• first cit- ing Leatherman v. Tarrant Cty. Narcotics Intelligence & Coordination Unit, 28 F.3d 1388, 1397 (5th Cir. 1994), then quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).