§Why CasetextPricing

Jama et al v. GCA Services Group, Inc.

REPLY

10 Cited authorities

  1. DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton

    833 F.2d 183 (9th Cir. 1987)   Cited 2,892 times
    Holding that district court abused its discretion by denying plaintiffs' motion to file fourth amended complaint

  2. Westlands Water District v. U.S.

    100 F.3d 94 (9th Cir. 1996)   Cited 518 times
    Holding that “uncertainty” caused by the specter of future litigation is “insufficient to establish plain legal prejudice”

  3. Kaplan v. Rose

    49 F.3d 1363 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 547 times
    Holding that the CEO of small company had proved good faith by submitting an uncontradicted affidavit stating that he never directed anyone to make misstatements that he knew to be misleading

  4. Hamilton v. Firestone Tire Rubber Co., Inc.

    679 F.2d 143 (9th Cir. 1982)   Cited 352 times
    Holding that the defendant had not established sufficient prejudice from the granting of a voluntary dismissal "merely by asserting that it had begun trial preparations"

  5. Jaramillo v. Burkhart

    59 F.3d 78 (8th Cir. 1995)   Cited 80 times

    Nos. 94-2650NE, No. 94-2651NE. Submitted March 13, 1995. Decided June 27, 1995. Edward F. Fogarty, Omaha, NE, argued, for appellant. Mark C. Laughlin, Omaha, NE, argued (Robert F. Rossiter, Jr., on brief), for appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges. FAGG, Circuit Judge. Bienvenida Jaramillo appeals the district court's order dismissing these diversity personal injury actions with prejudice. We reverse

  6. Michigan Surgery Investment, LLC v. Arman

    627 F.3d 572 (6th Cir. 2010)   Cited 33 times
    Stating that “a dismissal with prejudice operates as a rejection of the plaintiff's claims on the merits and res judicata precludes further litigation” (quoting United States v. One Tract of Real Property, 95 F.3d 422, 425–26 (6th Cir.1996))

  7. Toungate v. Konica Minolta Business Sol., USA, Inc.

    NO. C08-0423RL (W.D. Wash. Mar. 9, 2009)   Cited 2 times

    NO. C08-0423RL. March 9, 2009 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINT ROBERT LASNIK, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Court on "Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment," Dkt. #20, and "Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File their First Amended Complaint for Damages," Dkt. #29. Plaintiff Jimmy Toungate was employed by defendant Konica Minolta as a Customer Imaging Technician. After a seizure disorder

  8. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 344,767 times   920 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  9. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 107,486 times   195 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  10. Rule 11 - Signing Pleadings, Motions, and Other Papers; Representations to the Court; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 11   Cited 35,655 times   139 Legal Analyses
    Holding an "unrepresented party" to the same standard as an attorney