Mathis v. United Homes, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Section 15-108 is designed to “assur[e] that a non[-]settling defendant does not pay more than [his] equitable share”
• concluding that there is no federal right to contribution and/or indemnity under the FHA
• noting that owners’ claims for contribution “could be founded on every state law cause of action asserted by the plaintiffs,” including violations of NYSHRL
• explaining that, “in determining the adequacy of the [] Defendants’ [] cross-claims, the court shall consider the allegations set forth in the cross-claims and the plaintiffs’ complaints, which [were] integral to the cross-claims”
• explaining that, “in determining the adequacy of the [] Defendants’ [] cross-claims, the court shall consider the allegations set forth in the cross-claims and the plaintiffs’ complaints, which [were] integral to the cross-claims”
• stating that “section 1988 is a choice of law provision, nothing more.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).