Skip to main content
· 4/24/1995

Shames v. Coontz

Citations

  • 882 F. Supp. 1173
  • 36 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1218
  • 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5778
  • 1995 WL 254730

How courts have described this case

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

  • denying motion to amend complaint where plaintiff’s amended complaint containing new claims “would require the defendants to devote substantial additional resources to discovery and trial preparation and significantly delay the resolution of [plaintiff’s] current claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lasker

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.