Mitchell Energy Corp. v. Martin

How courts have described this case

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

• conducting a nearly identical analysis in finding requirements of Rule 9(b) satisfied
• listing the same general purposes, though in place of “strike suits” providing that Rule 9(b) seeks to preclude plaintiffs from bringing suit as a “pretext for discovery” in order to discover whether any fraudulent acts have occurred

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).