Woodford v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Consumer Protection Act applies to “offending conduct” that takes place within New Hampshire
• listing authority and discussing \gatekeeping function\ of court's preliminary assessment of expert evidence under Rule 7 0 2
• dismissing claims “based solely on [the 4 defendants’] role in the inmate appeals process” but denying motion to dismiss 5 claims plausibly suggesting that other defendants “were involved in authorizing or 6 implementing the modified programs at issue”
• “[P]laintiffs’ ‘competitor’ status does not foreclose resort to the Consumer Protection Act for redress of their asserted injuries.”
• \the full burden of exploration of the facts and assumptions underlying [expert testimony falls] squarely on the shoulders of apposing counsel's cross-examination\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).