20 Cited authorities

Blank v. Kirwan
39 Cal.3d 311 (Cal. 1985) Cited 3,090 times
Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"
Small v. Fritz Cos., Inc.
30 Cal.4th 167 (Cal. 2003) Cited 637 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that complaint for negligent misrepresentation in a holder action must be "pled with the same specificity required in a holder's action for fraud."
Pacific Gas Electric Co. v. Bear Stearns Co.
50 Cal.3d 1118 (Cal. 1990) Cited 680 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that interference with plaintiff's performance may give rise to a claim for interference with contractual relations if plaintiff's performance is made more costly or more burdensome
Della Penna v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc.
11 Cal.4th 376 (Cal. 1995) Cited 530 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that the tort of intentional or negligence interference with prospective economic advantage requires that a defendant's interference be wrongful "by some measure beyond the fact of the interference itself
Melchior v. New Line Productions, Inc.
106 Cal.App.4th 779 (Cal. Ct. App. 2003) Cited 316 times
Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment
Kransco v. American Empire Surplus Lines Ins. Co.
23 Cal.4th 390 (Cal. 2000) Cited 265 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding "contractual breaches are generally excluded from comparative fault allocations; favorably citing comment in treatise that "comparative fault [is] inapplicable to actions that are fully contractual in their gravamen"
Nestle v. City of Santa Monica
6 Cal.3d 920 (Cal. 1972) Cited 470 times
In Nestle we held, inter alia, that a nuisance action based on airport noise was improperly dismissed on the basis of government immunity, and suggested that the plaintiffs on remand might be able to demonstrate a continuing nuisance.
Mintz v. Blue Cross of California
172 Cal.App.4th 1594 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 133 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "corporate agents and employees acting for and on behalf of a corporation cannot be held liable for inducing a breach of the corporation's contract"
Foxborough v. Van Atta
26 Cal.App.4th 217 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994) Cited 154 times
Affirming denial of leave to amend in circumstances in which "proposed amendment would have been futile because it was barred by the statute of limitations"
Maglica v. Maglica
66 Cal.App.4th 442 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998) Cited 118 times
Describing quantum meruit as recovery of "the reasonable value of the services rendered provided they were of direct benefit to the defendant."
Section 2510 - Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 2510 Cited 4,318 times 80 Legal Analyses
Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"
Section 472 - Time for amending pleading by party of course
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 472 Cited 274 times
Providing that " party may amend its pleading once without leave of the court at any time before the answer, demurrer, or motion to strike is filed, or after a demurrer or motion to strike is filed but before the demurrer or motion to strike is heard if the amended pleading is filed and served no later than the date for filing an opposition to the demurrer or motion to strike"

Demurrer To Amended Complaint

20 Cited authorities

Holding that the standard for a failure to state a claim is whether "the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action"

Holding that complaint for negligent misrepresentation in a holder action must be "pled with the same specificity required in a holder's action for fraud."

Holding that interference with plaintiff's performance may give rise to a claim for interference with contractual relations if plaintiff's performance is made more costly or more burdensome

Holding that the tort of intentional or negligence interference with prospective economic advantage requires that a defendant's interference be wrongful "by some measure beyond the fact of the interference itself

Holding that there is no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment

Holding "contractual breaches are generally excluded from comparative fault allocations; favorably citing comment in treatise that "comparative fault [is] inapplicable to actions that are fully contractual in their gravamen"

In Nestle we held, inter alia, that a nuisance action based on airport noise was improperly dismissed on the basis of government immunity, and suggested that the plaintiffs on remand might be able to demonstrate a continuing nuisance.

Holding that "corporate agents and employees acting for and on behalf of a corporation cannot be held liable for inducing a breach of the corporation's contract"

Affirming denial of leave to amend in circumstances in which "proposed amendment would have been futile because it was barred by the statute of limitations"

Describing quantum meruit as recovery of "the reasonable value of the services rendered provided they were of direct benefit to the defendant."

Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"