Vallejo v. Santini-Padilla

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “[a]rguments that could have been raised before may not be raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration” (quotation omitted)
• noting that “[arguments that could have been raised before may not be raised for the first time in a motion for reconsideration” (quotation omitted)
• noting that “[r]epeated disobedience of a scheduling order is inherently prejudicial, because disruption of the court’s schedule and the preparation of other parties nearly always results.” (alteration in original
• noting that “‘[r]epeated disobedience of a scheduling order is inherently prejudicial because disruption of the court’s schedule and the preparation of other parties nearly always results.’” (alteration in original
• noting that “[p]laintiffs have not cited a single authority in support of their assertion that their failure to timely oppose the motion to dismiss did not constitute waiver” and that “[p]laintiffs did not properly raise their arguments below”
• finding waiver because the 5 appellant chose not oppose a motion to dismiss.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).