K.C. Ex Rel. Africa H. v. Shipman

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the appellant’s injury was not redressable, because the Court was “powerless to provide the very relief” the appellant requested, namely, reversing a preliminary injunction directed against both the appellant and a non-appealing party
• concluding that the state agency’s “decision to comply [with the preliminary injunction] means that the injunction is binding not only on the [state agency] itself, but also on the [agency]’s ‘agents’ and any who are in ‘active concert or participation’ with it”
• describing the relationship between the North Carolina’s single state agency and its subcontractors
• “The remedy afforded by Rule 60(b) is an ‘extraordinary’ one that is ‘only to be invoked upon a showing of exceptional circumstances.’”
• evaluating the “acting in concert” requirement

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).