§Why CasetextPricing

Daniell v. Sempris, LLC et al

MEMORANDUM

18 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 267,813 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 280,791 times   369 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. Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. v. Walgreen Co.

    631 F.3d 436 (7th Cir. 2011)   Cited 957 times
    Holding an unjust enrichment claim to the Rule 9(b) standard

  4. Siegel v. Shell Oil Co.

    612 F.3d 932 (7th Cir. 2010)   Cited 873 times
    Holding that individualized inquiries regarding “why a particular plaintiff purchased a particular brand of [the product]” were necessary to establish harm to each class member under the ICFA and, thus, common issues could not predominate

  5. Lachmund v. ADM Investor Services, Inc.

    191 F.3d 777 (7th Cir. 1999)   Cited 224 times
    Holding that general allegations of conspiracy were insufficient to allege an agency relationship between defendant and other defendants

  6. Martis v. Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance

    388 Ill. App. 3d 1017 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009)   Cited 170 times
    Finding that "[b]ecause there was no valid underlying fraud claim, the trial court properly dismissed plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim"

  7. Jackson v. South Holland Dodge, Inc.

    197 Ill. 2d 39 (Ill. 2001)   Cited 71 times
    Finding compliance with federal statute to be a defense to liability under the Consumer Fraud Act

  8. La Throp v. Bell Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n

    68 Ill. 2d 375 (Ill. 1977)   Cited 133 times
    Concluding that provisions requiring advance payments under a mortgage contract were more consistent with a debtor-creditor relationship

  9. Zadrozny v. City Colleges

    220 Ill. App. 3d 290 (Ill. App. Ct. 1991)   Cited 82 times

    No. 1-89-3329 Opinion filed September 23, 1991. Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County; the Hon. David G. Lichtenstein, Judge, presiding. John G. Cadwell, of Chicago, for appellant. Feiwell, Galper Lasky, Ltd., of Chicago (Georgia A. Kolettis, of counsel), for appellees. PRESIDING JUSTICE MANNING delivered the opinion of the court: This is an appeal by a teacher, Mitchell Zadrozny (Zadrozny or appellant), employed at Wright Junior College, one of the City Colleges of Chicago, from the trial

  10. Bank of Am., N.A. v. Knight

    875 F. Supp. 2d 837 (N.D. Ill. 2012)   Cited 9 times

    No. 11 C 0303. 2012-06-20 BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., individually and as assignee of certain claims, Plaintiff, v. James A. KNIGHT, Cynthia Knight, Deforest Davis, Paul Flask, Marie O'Barr, Barry Brubaker, Peter Willmott, Robert Wasielewski, Lisa Rogers, Olney Partners LP, Knight Quartz Flooring—Global LLC, Quartz Flooring North America, LLC, FGMK, LLC, Frost Ruttenberg & Rothblatt, P.C., Defendants. Michael L. Molinaro, Blair Robert Zanzig, Melissa Ann Mickey, Theresa Lynn Davis, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 164,455 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  12. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 40,207 times   337 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  13. Section 815 ILCS 505/1

    815 ILCS 505/1   Cited 2,221 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Defining "consumer" as "any person who purchases or contracts for the purchase of merchandise not for resale in the ordinary course of his trade or business but for his use or that of a member of his household"