Wms., Lora v. City of Phila., Pets

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the appellants forfeited a legal theory by failing to present it in district court
• holding argument forfeited because parties “did not alert the district court to their current argument”
• “conclusory assertions in footnotes do not adequately present us with an argument on these claims, so we consider them abandoned”
• “A party’s offhand reference to an issue in a footnote, without citation to legal authority or reasoned argument, is insufficient to present the issue for [the court’s] consideration.” (quoting Verlo v. Martinez, 820 F.3d 1113, 1127 (10th Cir. 2016))
• deeming claims abandoned where not mentioned in opening brief
• treating claims not mentioned on appeal as abandoned

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).