33 Cited authorities

Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.
528 U.S. 167 (2000) Cited 7,153 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing
Los Angeles v. Lyons
461 U.S. 95 (1983) Cited 7,506 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold
Kolender v. Lawson
461 U.S. 352 (1983) Cited 3,041 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding state misdemeanor statute unconstitutionally vague within the meaning of the Due Process Clause
Wolfe v. Strankman
392 F.3d 358 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 1,121 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding "state agencies are ... protected from suit under § 1983"
Armstrong v. Davis
275 F.3d 849 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 747 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that " Garrett makes clear that . . . there is no barrier to the injunction against Nielson in his official capacity as Secretary of the Board [under the ADA]."
Kahn v. East Side Union High School Dist.
31 Cal.4th 990 (Cal. 2003) Cited 455 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that for an intervening act properly to be considered a superseding cause, "the act must have produced harm of a kind and degree far beyond the risk that the original tortfeasor should have foreseen"
Knight v. Jewett
3 Cal.4th 296 (Cal. 1992) Cited 420 times 5 Legal Analyses
Adopting a "reckless or intentional" standard in a case involving an injury suffered in a touch football game
Santa Barbara v. Superior Court
41 Cal.4th 747 (Cal. 2007) Cited 210 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that an agreement regarding sports or recreational programs or services that purports to release liability for future gross negligence is generally unenforceable as a matter of public policy
Biakanja v. Irving
49 Cal.2d 647 (Cal. 1958) Cited 769 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that a decedent's intended beneficiary had a special relationship with the notary public who had prepared a defective will
Avila v. Citrus Cmty. Coll. Dist.
38 Cal.4th 148 (Cal. 2006) Cited 139 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a college that hosted an athletic event owed a duty to both its own athletes and visiting athletes based upon the college's relationship with them and the benefits it received from intercollegiate competition
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 345,981 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Alice Mayall v. USA Water Polo, Inc.

33 Cited authorities

Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing

Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold

Holding state misdemeanor statute unconstitutionally vague within the meaning of the Due Process Clause

Holding "state agencies are ... protected from suit under § 1983"

Holding that " Garrett makes clear that . . . there is no barrier to the injunction against Nielson in his official capacity as Secretary of the Board [under the ADA]."

Holding that for an intervening act properly to be considered a superseding cause, "the act must have produced harm of a kind and degree far beyond the risk that the original tortfeasor should have foreseen"

Adopting a "reckless or intentional" standard in a case involving an injury suffered in a touch football game

Holding that an agreement regarding sports or recreational programs or services that purports to release liability for future gross negligence is generally unenforceable as a matter of public policy

Holding that a decedent's intended beneficiary had a special relationship with the notary public who had prepared a defective will

Holding that a college that hosted an athletic event owed a duty to both its own athletes and visiting athletes based upon the college's relationship with them and the benefits it received from intercollegiate competition

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