Kevin Murphy v. Aurora Loan Services

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming dismissal of portions of a quiet-title claim because the alleged defects in the defendants’ ability to foreclose were “regurgitations of the ‘show-me-the-note’ theory”
• “[W]here the parties did not adequately develop an issue, remanding to allow the district court to address the matter in the first instance is appropriate.”
• dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where the party never submitted proposed amended complaint or clarified what one might have contained
• dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where the party never submitted proposed amended complaint or clarified what one might have contained
• “Dismissal with prejudice is appropriate where a party never submitted a proposed amended complaint or clarified what one might have contained.”’
• “While we generally will not consider arguments raised for the first time in a reply brief, because this challenge relates to our jurisdiction, we will consider the merits of the claim.” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).