Weinstein v. Black Diamond S. S. Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that \serious consideration\ is a factor relevant to the materiality inquiry but not a \prerequisite\
• explaining that misrepresentations are “statements that the employer knows to be false, or that have no reasonable basis in fact”
• “There is no requirement that the serious consideration of future benefits is necessary in order for the statement to be deemed misleading.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).