§Why CasetextPricing

Declaration

undefined

64 Cited authorities

  1. Prof'l Collection Consultants v. Lauron

    8 Cal.App.5th 958 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017)   Cited 122 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Underlying theory of relief indicated gravamen of complaint was breach of contract despite claims labeled as "account stated" and "open book account"

  2. Riggs v. Prober & Raphael

    681 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 126 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding that whether a communication "violates the Rosenthal Act turns on whether it violates the FDCPA"

  3. Cruz v. Int'l Collection Corp.

    673 F.3d 991 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 100 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellants waived an argument by failing to raise it in their opening brief

  4. Perez v. Gordon & Wong Law Grp., P.C.

    Case No.: 11-CV-03323-LHK (N.D. Cal. Mar. 26, 2012)   Cited 93 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the heightened standard applies to affirmative defenses

  5. Freeman v. ABC Legal Services, Inc.

    827 F. Supp. 2d 1065 (N.D. Cal. 2011)   Cited 73 times
    Holding that factual allegations of "sewer service" adequately pled violations of §§ 1692d, 1692e, and 1692f against process server

  6. Freeman v. ABC Legal Services, Inc.

    877 F. Supp. 2d 919 (N.D. Cal. 2012)   Cited 52 times
    Concluding that Plaintiffs lacked standing to seek injunctive relief because "Plaintiffs' current allegations establish only that [the defendant] will (allegedly) harm many people, but not necessarily that it will harm Plaintiffs again"

  7. Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC

    6 Cal.5th 844 (Cal. 2019)   Cited 33 times

    S242799 02-15-2019 Julia C. MEZA, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., Defendants and Respondents. Consumer Law Center, Inc., Fred W. Schwinn, Raeon R. Roulston, Matthew C. Salmonsen ; Horwitz, Horwitz & Associates and O. Randolph Bragg for Plaintiff and Appellant. Sharon Djemal, Robin Wetherill, Leigh E. Ferrin, Kari E. Gibson, Arthur D. Levy and Noah Zinner for East Bay Community Law Center, Public Law Center and Housing and Economic Rights Advocates as Amici

  8. Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC

    Case No. 14-CV-00735-LHK (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2016)   Cited 28 times
    Rejecting Laffey matrix

  9. Dion v. Fulton Friedman & Gullace LLP

    Case No. 11-2727 SC (N.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2012)   Cited 34 times
    Explaining that a majority of district courts have extended Twombly and Iqbal to affirmative defense pleading

  10. Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC

    Case No.: 14-CV-00735-LHK (N.D. Cal. Aug. 19, 2014)   Cited 20 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Denying motion to strike offset defense

  11. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 72,180 times   128 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  12. Section 1692k - Civil liability

    15 U.S.C. § 1692k   Cited 6,183 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding debt collectors civilly liable for illicit debt collection practices

  13. Section 1692g - Validation of debts

    15 U.S.C. § 1692g   Cited 3,489 times   70 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth requirements for disputing a debt

  14. Section 998 - Offer served prior to resolution of dispute by arbitration

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 998   Cited 1,466 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Cost-shifting provision applies to a plaintiff who rejects a section 998 offer and "fails to obtain a more favorable judgment"

  15. Section 395 - Action for injury to person or personal property or death from wrongful act or negligence; offer or provision of goods, services, loans or extension of credit for family or household use

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 395   Cited 471 times
    Assuming that that section applies to corporations

  16. Section 3345 - Unfair or deceptive acts or practice or unfair methods of competition directed at senior citizens or disabled persons

    Cal. Civ. Code § 3345   Cited 27 times

    (a) This section shall apply only in actions brought by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of those individuals specified in paragraphs (1) to (3), inclusive, to redress unfair or deceptive acts or practices or unfair methods of competition. (1) Senior citizens, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 1761. (2) Disabled persons, as defined in subdivision (g) of Section 1761. (3) Veterans, as defined in Section 18540.4 of the Government Code. (b) Whenever a trier of fact is authorized by a statute

  17. Rule 3.1 - Title

    Cal. R. 3.1

    The rules in this title may be referred to as the Civil Rules. Cal. R. Ct. 3.1 Rule 3.1 adopted effective 1/1/2007.