Salois v. Dime Savings Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• guoting S. Bravo Svs. v. Containment Tech. Corp., 96 F.3d 1372, 1374-75 (Fed. Cir. 1996)
• finding the district court “properly dismissed” a prisoner’s civil rights 25 action after finding the plaintiff was not entitled to proceed in forma pauperis under Section 1915(e)
• “[Although ... reasonable diligence is factually based, it may be determined as a matter of law where the underlying facts are admitted or established without dispute.”
• “[A]llegations of fraudulent concealment do not modify the requirement that plaintiffs must have exercised reasonable diligence.”
• “one who signs a writing that is designed to serve as a legal document . . . is presumed to know its contents”
• “AEDPA’s one-year time limit did not begin to run against 21 any state prisoner prior to the statute’s date of enactment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).