King v. Graham Holding Co., Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• construing Davis as holding that courts must have some discretion in this area, and characterizing as “intolerable” a situation where an appellate court is forced to send back deficient briefs for rebriefing, even after argument
• construing Davis as holding that courts must have some discretion in this area, and characterizing as “intolerable” a situation where an appellate court is forced to send back deficient briefs for rebriefing, even after argument
• no physical harm where plaintiffs alleged financial injuries of $6 million from credit-score decrease

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).