London v. London

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that under claim for money had and received, the only thing that needs to be proved \`is that defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to [the plaintiff]'\
• holding that under claim for money had and received, the only thing that needs to be proved “ ‘is that defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to [the plaintiff]’ ”
• holding that under claim for money had and received, the only thing that needs to be proved “‘is that defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to [the plaintiff]’”
• holding that pleading was sufficient to assert a claim for money-had and received, under which the only thing that needs to be proved “‘is that defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to [the plaintiff]’ ”
• holding that pleading was sufficient to assert a claim for money had and received, under which the only thing that needs to be proved \`is that defendant holds money which in equity and good conscience belongs to [the plaintiff]'\
• recognizing that “allowing a party to conduct full discovery, file motions going to the merits, and seek arbitration only on the eve of trial defeats the FAA’s goal of resolving disputes without the delay and expense of litigation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).