Louisville & Nashville R. R. v. Wilkins

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that amending the 2 Unless stated otherwise, this report and recommenda�on omits internal quota�on marks and cita�ons from quota�ons. complaint prior to close of discovery will not prejudice the defendants
• dismissing breach of fiduciary duty claim and aiding and abetting the same alleged breach of fiduciary duty where they were duplicative of the alleged breach of contract
• amending the complaint prior to close of discovery will not prejudice the defendants
• denying leave to replead fiduciary duty claim because “plaintiffs do not allege or point to a single fact supporting the proposed breach of fiduciary duty claim that is not already included in the proposed breach of contract claim”
• dismissing fiduciary duty claim as duplicative of breach of contract claim where “plaintiffs [did] not allege or point to a single fact supporting the proposed breach of fiduciary duty claim that [was] not already included in the proposed breach of contract claim”
• dismissing fiduciary duty claim as duplicative of breach of contract claim because “plaintiffs do not allege or point to a single fact supporting the proposed breach of fiduciary duty claim that is not already included in the proposed breach of contract claim”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).