Walsh v. Hagee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs reliance on “well-established principles” did not constitute an “intervening change of controlling law”
• holding that an intervening case decided on \well-established principles\ did not constitute an \intervening change of controlling law\
• rejecting movant’s attempt to “reiterate[] arguments that he raised . . . in the briefing for the motions to dismiss”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Habliston v. Finra Dispute Resolution, Inc.
  District of Columbia· 2017-05-08· cited 9×
• Davenport v. Djourabchi
  D.C. Circuit· 2018-06-11· cited 7×
• Chien v. Ransom
  District of Columbia· 2020-09-28
• Chien v. Morris
  District of Columbia· 2021-11-12
• Clean Label Project Foundation v. Garden of Life, LLC
  District of Columbia· 2022-05-24

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• McLaughlin v. Holder
  District of Columbia· 2012-05-25· cited 34×
• Kittner v. Gates
  District of Columbia· 2011-05-11· cited 28×
• Walsh v. Hagee
  District of Columbia· 2013-12-04· cited 27×
• Jung v. Ass'n of American Medical Colleges
  District of Columbia· 2005-01-25· cited 27×
• Wright v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
  District of Columbia· 2009-02-24· cited 21×
• Walsh v. Hagee
  District of Columbia· 2012-10-26· cited 18×
• Goodman v. Blount
  D.C. Circuit· 2011-06-21· cited 4×