§Why CasetextPricing

Estrada v. Capella University Incorporated et al

MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Capella University's Motion to Dismiss

37 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 255,314 times   280 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 269,063 times   367 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,229 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

  4. Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems

    637 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 2,526 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding a complaint failed to satisfy Rule 9(b) where the allegations were lacking in detail

  5. Regents of University of Michigan v. Ewing

    474 U.S. 214 (1985)   Cited 1,091 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, even if a student's assumed property interest in a six-year program of study culminating in an undergraduate degree and a medical degree "gave rise to a substantive right under the Due Process Clause to continued enrollment free from arbitrary state action, the facts of record disclose no such action"

  6. Board of Curators, Univ. of Mo. v. Horowitz

    435 U.S. 78 (1978)   Cited 969 times
    Holding that a medical student's dismissal was academic because it "rested on the academic judgment of school officials that she did not have the necessary clinical ability to perform adequately as a medical doctor and was making insufficient progress toward that goal"

  7. Somers ex rel. Herself v. Apple, Inc.

    729 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2013)   Cited 606 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff's theory was "implausible in the face of contradictory . . . facts alleged in her complaint"

  8. Kohler v. Inter-Tel Technologies

    244 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 176 times
    Holding that issues raised in a brief's statement of issues that are unsupported by argument are deemed abandoned

  9. Ross v. Creighton University

    957 F.2d 410 (7th Cir. 1992)   Cited 201 times
    Holding that Illinois Supreme Court would refuse to recognize the tort of educational malpractice

  10. Comerica Bank V. Mahmoodi

    224 Ariz. 289 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 107 times
    Outlining the elements of fraud under Arizona law

  11. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,122 times   321 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  12. Section 12-341.01 - Recovery of attorney fees

    Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 12-341.01   Cited 2,620 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Permitting an award of reasonable attorney's fees to the successful party in a contested action arising out of express or implied contract