54 Cited authorities

Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA
568 U.S. 398 (2013) Cited 3,361 times 169 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the absence of some independent existing or impending harm, plaintiffs "cannot manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves"
Starr v. Baca
652 F.3d 1202 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 5,592 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff
Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc.
316 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 5,136 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court abused its discretion because "[d]ismissal with prejudice and without leave to amend is not appropriate unless it is clear on de novo review that the complaint could not be saved by amendment"
U.S. v. Ritchie
342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,936 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"
Swartz v. KPMG LLP
476 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 2,946 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[t]o the extent Swartz seeks a declaration of defendants' liability for damages sought for his other causes of action,” claim must be dismissed as “merely duplicative”
Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court
51 Cal.4th 310 (Cal. 2011) Cited 1,615 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"
Coto Settlement v. Eisenberg
593 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2010) Cited 855 times
Holding that on a motion to dismiss, a court may consider documents outside the complaint when the contents of the document are alleged in the complaint, the document's authenticity is not in question, and there are no disputed issues as to the document's relevance
Wyler Summit v. Turner Broadcasting Sys
135 F.3d 658 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 1,265 times
Denying motion to dismiss contract claim
Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Co.
451 Mass. 623 (Mass. 2008) Cited 839 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a plaintiff's obligation to provide the grounds of his entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions"
Gerritsen v. Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
112 F. Supp. 3d 1011 (C.D. Cal. 2015) Cited 456 times
Holding that judicial notice of defendant's website was improper where defendant was not a government body and the purpose of the website was not to provide public information
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 163,831 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 94,788 times 92 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 40,114 times 335 Legal Analyses
Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 29,751 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."

Daniel Chesler et al v. Hyundai Motor America Inc et al

54 Cited authorities

Holding that, in the absence of some independent existing or impending harm, plaintiffs "cannot manufacture standing merely by inflicting harm on themselves"

Holding that a series of investigative reports documenting systemic deficiencies in a jail put the defendant-supervisor on notice of the risk of the harm that befell the plaintiff

Holding that the district court abused its discretion because "[d]ismissal with prejudice and without leave to amend is not appropriate unless it is clear on de novo review that the complaint could not be saved by amendment"

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"

Holding that “[t]o the extent Swartz seeks a declaration of defendants' liability for damages sought for his other causes of action,” claim must be dismissed as “merely duplicative”

Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"

Holding that on a motion to dismiss, a court may consider documents outside the complaint when the contents of the document are alleged in the complaint, the document's authenticity is not in question, and there are no disputed issues as to the document's relevance

Denying motion to dismiss contract claim

Holding that "a plaintiff's obligation to provide the grounds of his entitle[ment] to relief requires more than labels and conclusions"

Holding that judicial notice of defendant's website was improper where defendant was not a government body and the purpose of the website was not to provide public information

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity