§Why CasetextPricing

Cirrus Education Inc. et al v. Christopher M. Adams et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION:

59 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 27,982 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  2. Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America

    511 U.S. 375 (1994)   Cited 19,149 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that absent a reservation of jurisdiction in the stipulated dismissal order, federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider enforcement of a settlement agreement

  3. Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.

    549 U.S. 118 (2007)   Cited 2,550 times   90 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

  4. Allen v. Wright

    468 U.S. 737 (1984)   Cited 4,773 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, even when plaintiffs allege "one of the most serious injuries recognized in our legal system," it's not justiciable where "the chain of causation between the challenged Government conduct and the asserted injury are far too weak for the chain as a whole to sustain respondents' standing"

  5. Moss v. U.S. Secret Service

    572 F.3d 962 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 8,746 times
    Holding that the court lacked jurisdiction over the district court's deferral of the summary judgment motion

  6. Califano v. Sanders

    430 U.S. 99 (1977)   Cited 4,285 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the APA is not to be interpreted as an implied grant of subject-matter jurisdiction to review agency actions"

  7. Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner

    387 U.S. 136 (1967)   Cited 5,289 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs subject to a regulation had standing to challenge it even though the Attorney General had yet to "authorize criminal and seizure actions for violations of the statute"

  8. Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court

    51 Cal.4th 310 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 1,565 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"

  9. Leadsinger, Inc. v. BMG Music Publishing

    512 F.3d 522 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,380 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may deny leave to amend where amendment would be futile

  10. Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    29 Cal.4th 1134 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 1,658 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff cannot recover damages under Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200 unless plaintiff has "an ownership interest in the money it seeks to recover"

  11. 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 347,506 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 2201 - Creation of remedy

    28 U.S.C. § 2201   Cited 24,602 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

  13. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 17,893 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  14. Section 425.16 - California anti-SLAPP law

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16   Cited 2,846 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

  15. Section 45 - Libel defined

    Cal. Civ. Code § 45   Cited 640 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining libel

  16. Section 187 - All means necessary to carry into effect jurisdiction given court or judicial officer

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 187   Cited 569 times
    Granting court with jurisdiction broad authority to use "any suitable process or mode of proceeding" in the absence of specific statutory procedure