Stoll's Admr. v. Tarr

How courts have described this case

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

• “There is no allegation that these loans, made before Torres was terminated, were related in any way to Torres’s alleged trademark infringement after his termination.”
• “Evidence relevant to [a state law claim] . . . has [no] overlap with the evidence necessary to prove or defend against Plaintiff’s federal claims.”
• no overlap of evidence between loans extended in 2011 and trademark infringement in 2012
• the conduct underlying the state and federal claims was “entirely separate”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).