§Why CasetextPricing

Cristina Aguirre v. California School of Court Reporters (Cscr) - Riverside

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint

27 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 260,142 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 273,590 times   368 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  3. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 16,267 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"

  4. U.S. v. Ritchie

    342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 3,804 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a court may consider "certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment"

  5. United States ex rel. Lee v. Corinthian Colls.

    655 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 1,555 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that this Court "can affirm a 12(b) dismissal 'on any ground supported by the record, even if the district court did not rely on the ground.'" (quoting Livid Holdings, Ltd. v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 416 F.3d 940, 950 (9th Cir. 2005))

  6. Molski v. M.J. Cable, Inc.

    481 F.3d 724 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 1,162 times
    Holding that the “client or customer” limitation of § 12182(b) does not apply to § 12182 or to § 12182(b)

  7. Marder v. Lopez

    450 F.3d 445 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 1,044 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding courts may consider on a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) extrinsic documents if the complaint refers to the document; the document is central to the plaintiff's claim; and no party questions the authenticity of the [document proffered]”

  8. Zukle v. Regents of the University of California

    166 F.3d 1041 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 533 times
    Holding that the anti-discrimination provision of § 504 requires the plaintiff to show that she is "otherwise qualified" for the position at issue

  9. Munson v. Del Taco, Inc.

    46 Cal.4th 661 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 340 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a plaintiff need not prove intentional discrimination to recover for an ADA violation under the Unruh Act

  10. Arizona ex Rel. Goddard v. Harkins Amusement

    603 F.3d 666 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 208 times
    Rejecting similar reasoning in a Title III case; adding: "For example, a courthouse that was accessible only by steps could not avoid ADA liability by arguing that everyone--including the wheelchair bound--has equal access to the steps. And an office building could not avoid having to put Braille numbering on the buttons in its elevator by arguing that everyone--including the blind--has equal access to the written text."; explaining that, while other decisions "support the proposition that the content of a good or service need not be altered under the ADA, neither of those decisions turn on whether a place of public accommodation must provide an auxiliary aid or service that falls within the mandate of § 12182(b)."

  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 354,229 times   943 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 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 63,426 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  13. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 29,078 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  14. Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 1   Cited 15,441 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

  15. Section 51 - Unruh Civil Rights Act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 51   Cited 4,913 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating ADA violations

  16. Section 12182 - Prohibition of discrimination by public accommodations

    42 U.S.C. § 12182   Cited 3,963 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that public accommodations cannot "directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize standards or criteria or methods of administration" that have the effect of discriminating on the basis of disability."