41 Cited authorities

Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,874 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"
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,646 times 505 Legal Analyses
Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”
Comcast Corp. v. Behrend
569 U.S. 27 (2013) Cited 2,236 times 232 Legal Analyses
Holding that at the class certification stage, "any model supporting a plaintiff's damages case must be consistent with its liability case"
Ellis v. Costco Wholesale Corp.
657 F.3d 970 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 1,122 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs' commonality must connect to their claim for class relief
In re Tobacco II Cases
46 Cal.4th 298 (Cal. 2009) Cited 1,203 times 35 Legal Analyses
Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied
Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co.
666 F.3d 581 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 968 times 51 Legal Analyses
Holding that false advertising "class must be defined in such a way as to include only members who were exposed to advertising that is alleged to be materially misleading"
Hanon v. Dataproducts Corp.
976 F.2d 497 (9th Cir. 1992) Cited 1,615 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendants' statements emphasizing superior quality were material because "a reasonable jury could conclude that [the company] publicly released optimistic statements ... when it knew [its product] could not be built reliably"
Denney v. Deutsche Bank AG
443 F.3d 253 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 598 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding "no class may be certified that contains members lacking Article III standing"
Valentino v. Carter-Wallace, Inc.
97 F.3d 1227 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 705 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court abused its discretion by certifying the class in part because the plaintiffs made "no showing . . . of how the class trial could be conducted"
Georgine v. Amchem Prods., Inc.
83 F.3d 610 (3d Cir. 1996) Cited 558 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that " considered as a litigation class," the class cannot meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23's requirements
Section 1624 - Contracts deemed invalid unless note or memorandum in writing
Cal. Civ. Code § 1624 Cited 1,318 times 4 Legal Analyses
Establishing that the statute of frauds applies to contracts "for the sale of real property, or of an interest therein"
Section 1698 - Contract in writing
Cal. Civ. Code § 1698 Cited 524 times 3 Legal Analyses
Addressing oral modification, waiver, and estoppel
Section 1701 - Short title
12 U.S.C. § 1701 Cited 490 times
This chapter may be cited as the "National Housing Act." 12 U.S.C. § 1701 June 27, 1934, ch. 847, 48 Stat. 1246. EDITORIAL NOTES REFERENCES IN TEXTThis chapter, referred to in text, was in the original "this Act", meaning act June 27, 1934, ch. 847, 48 Stat. 1246, which is classified principally to this chapter (§1701 et seq.). For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables. STATUTORY NOTES AND RELATED SUBSIDIARIES SHORT TITLE OF 2019 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 116-33 §1, July 25, 2019, 133
Section 1217 - Validity of unrecorded instrument
Cal. Civ. Code § 1217 Cited 92 times
Providing that an instrument is valid even if it is not recorded
Section 2922 - Writing executed with formalities required in case of grant of real property
Cal. Civ. Code § 2922 Cited 87 times
Providing that a "mortgage can be created, renewed, or extended, only by writing, executed with the formalities required in the case of a grant of real property"

Esquivel et al v Bank of America, N.A., et al

41 Cited authorities

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"

Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”

Holding that at the class certification stage, "any model supporting a plaintiff's damages case must be consistent with its liability case"

Holding that plaintiffs' commonality must connect to their claim for class relief

Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied

Holding that false advertising "class must be defined in such a way as to include only members who were exposed to advertising that is alleged to be materially misleading"

Holding that the defendants' statements emphasizing superior quality were material because "a reasonable jury could conclude that [the company] publicly released optimistic statements ... when it knew [its product] could not be built reliably"

Holding "no class may be certified that contains members lacking Article III standing"

Holding that the district court abused its discretion by certifying the class in part because the plaintiffs made "no showing . . . of how the class trial could be conducted"

Holding that " considered as a litigation class," the class cannot meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23's requirements

Establishing that the statute of frauds applies to contracts "for the sale of real property, or of an interest therein"

Addressing oral modification, waiver, and estoppel

Providing that an instrument is valid even if it is not recorded

Providing that a "mortgage can be created, renewed, or extended, only by writing, executed with the formalities required in the case of a grant of real property"