Wiggins v. District Cablevision, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “[i]t is well established that after a responsive pleading has been served, the standards for adding parties are the same whether the motion is made under Rule 15 or Rule 21”
• stating that “[i]t is well established that after a responsive pleading has been served, the standards for adding parties are the same whether the motion is made under Rule 15 or Rule 21”
• denying the plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend because, although the plaintiff asserted two new causes of action, he asserted no new material facts to support them
• federal pleading standards govern Rule 12(b)(6) motions, even in a diversity action concerning state substantive law
• “[I]t is well established that after a responsive pleading has been served, the standards for adding parties are the same whether the motion is made under Rule 15 or Rule 21.”
• “Section 1681h(e) of the Act has been interpreted to provide a qualified immunity 18 for consumer reporting agencies except as to false information furnished with malice or with 19 willful intent to injure.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).