Marrowbone Coal & Coke Co. v. Coleman

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining the “Court nevertheless has reviewed plaintiffs’ proposed surreply and has determined that its arguments do not alter the outcome of defendants’ motion” and accordingly the “Court would reach the same result on defendants’ Motion to Dismiss regardless”
• “Immediately after being informed of the error, T-Mobile reinstated plaintiff’s employment and offered her additional time to return to work or obtain proper authorization to extend her time off.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).