Lahoti v. Vericheck, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding customers’ statements of confusion were 10 hearsay but admissible under the state of mind exception
• determining that 7 testimony describing calls from customers about their confusion was admissible hearsay “under 8 the ‘state of mind’ exception to the hearsay rule”
• concluding “VERICHECK” and “vericheck.com” are identical or at least confusingly similar
• affirming finding 13 that “VERICHECK” is suggestive because “consumers must separate ‘veri’ from ‘check’ and 14 reason that ‘veri’ is short for ‘verification services’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).