Levingston v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan

How courts have described this case

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

• finding 10 no proximate cause where plaintiff did not show “that it was forced to spend its 11 money or that it was otherwise shortchanged by Defendants’ actions”
• finding no proximate cause where the plaintiff did 23 not show “that it was forced to spend its money or that it was otherwise shortchanged by Defendants’ actions”
• “no state law indicating that voluntary expenditures to track 27 down stolen property constitutes a separate injury to property”
• “no state law indicating that voluntary expenditures to 11 track down stolen property constitutes a separate injury to property”
• “no state law indicating that voluntary expenditures to track down 8 stolen property constitutes a separate injury to property”
• “no state law indicating that voluntary expenditures to track down 27 stolen property constitutes a separate injury to property”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).