Ocean Ships, Inc. v. Thomas E. Stiles and Stiles & Wright, P.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing a rebuttable presumption that the face of the complaint is a “good faith” representation of the amount in controversy
• explaining in the context of determining the real party in interest for purposes of Rule 17(a
• applying this standard in a malpractice case involving a lawyer’s failure to perfect an appeal
• vacating damages award for malpractice resulting in plaintiff’s liability in connection with first action because there was evidence that plaintiff would have incurred the same liability in a second action
• describing elements as “(1) a duty, (2) a breach of the duty, and (3) proof that the actual damages were proximately caused by the breach of the duty.” (quoting Tinelli v. Redl, 199 F.3d 603, 606 (2d Cir. 1999))
• “[s]tatus as a real party in interest [under Rule 17] is a procedural matter” governed by federal law, although “state-law questions may arise in determining what interest [a party] actually has”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).