Young Hi Ko v. Seaview Chevrolet

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs' failure to 2 This court has recognized the same benefits. See Barros v. Garland, 31 F.4th 51, 59 (1st Cir. 2022
• holding that exhaustion principle does not apply in part because \the remedy provided by the review procedure\ is not what is \requested by the plaintiffs in their amended complaint\
• providing that the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies did not apply where existing law could not provide the litigant with relief

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).