Yolanda Bediako v. Stein Mart, Inc. A Florida Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not abuse discretion in denying request to amend complaint including new claim that was not related enough to the original claim to put defendant “on notice that [plaintiff] was pursuing such a claim”
• describing that courts are not required to “create claims that are not clearly raised”
• discussing Nickens v. White, 536 F.2d 802, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1976)
• discussing Nickens v. White, 536 F.2d 802, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1976)
• the court is not required to “divine the litigant’s intent and create claims that are not clearly raised”
• federal courts are not required to “divine the litigant’s intent and create claims that are not clearly raised”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).