26 Cited authorities

Conley v. Gibson
355 U.S. 41 (1957) Cited 59,179 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.
510 U.S. 517 (1994) Cited 2,899 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988
Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA
317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 4,325 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims
Whittlestone, Inc. v. Handi-Craft Co.
618 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 1,370 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b) is the appropriate means of disposing of an improper claim for relief
Equilon Enterprises, Llc. v. Consumer Cause, Inc.
29 Cal.4th 53 (Cal. 2002) Cited 1,809 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that fee shifting under the Anti-SLAPP statute without a showing of the plaintiff's "intent to chill" free speech did not violate the Constitution or "inappropriately punish plaintiffs," especially given that a plaintiff is burdened by payment of attorney fees "only when the plaintiff burdens free speech with an unsubstantiated claim"
City of Cotati v. Cashman
29 Cal.4th 69 (Cal. 2002) Cited 1,272 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding "the mere fact an action was filed after protected activity took place does not mean it arose from that activity"; rejecting defendant's argument that plaintiff's complaint "arose" from defendant's having previously filed lawsuit, where plaintiff's complaint "contain[ed] no reference to the [defendant's] action"
Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty
984 F.2d 1524 (9th Cir. 1993) Cited 1,387 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court properly struck lengthy, stale and previously litigated factual allegations to streamline the action
Wyshak v. City Nat. Bank
607 F.2d 824 (9th Cir. 1979) Cited 651 times
Holding that plaintiff was not prejudiced by assertion of statute of limitations defense in amended answer because the defense would have been "effective at the outset of [plaintiff's] suit."
Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc.
144 Cal.App.4th 140 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) Cited 276 times
Determining an award of attorney fees is a highly fact-specific task best left to discretion of the trial judge, familiar with the matter and with the expertise to determine the value of the legal services performed in the case
Colaprico v. Sun Microsystems, Inc.
758 F. Supp. 1335 (N.D. Cal. 1991) Cited 353 times
Denying defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's statements of past historical facts in FAC, noting that a complaint should not be viewed in isolation. "In conjunction with other allegations . . . the court cannot say the [historical facts] contribute nothing to plaintiff's claims."
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 358,269 times 949 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 425.16 - California anti-SLAPP law
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16 Cited 2,960 times 110 Legal Analyses
Reversing district court's denial of anti-SLAPP motion as moot and remanding for consideration of the motion, including attorney's fees

Brian P. Ballo vs. Michael G. York

26 Cited authorities

Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

Holding that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b) is the appropriate means of disposing of an improper claim for relief

Holding that the district court properly struck lengthy, stale and previously litigated factual allegations to streamline the action

Holding that plaintiff was not prejudiced by assertion of statute of limitations defense in amended answer because the defense would have been "effective at the outset of [plaintiff's] suit."

Determining an award of attorney fees is a highly fact-specific task best left to discretion of the trial judge, familiar with the matter and with the expertise to determine the value of the legal services performed in the case

Denying defendant's motion to strike plaintiff's statements of past historical facts in FAC, noting that a complaint should not be viewed in isolation. "In conjunction with other allegations . . . the court cannot say the [historical facts] contribute nothing to plaintiff's claims."

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Reversing district court's denial of anti-SLAPP motion as moot and remanding for consideration of the motion, including attorney's fees