Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 260,142 times 281 Legal AnalysesHolding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 273,590 times 368 Legal AnalysesHolding 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
Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA
317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 4,282 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding 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
Swartz v. KPMG LLP
476 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 2007) Cited 2,912 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding 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”
Kearns v. Ford Motor Co.
567 F.3d 1120 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 2,305 times 5 Legal AnalysesHolding that circumstances constituting fraud must be stated with particularity
Lazy Y Ranch Ltd. v. Behrens
546 F.3d 580 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 1,347 times 3 Legal AnalysesHolding that courts “need not accept as true allegations contradicting documents that are referenced in the complaint.”
Newcal Industries, Inc. v. IKON Office Solution
513 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2008) Cited 876 times 2 Legal AnalysesHolding that plaintiff who had already filed a fraud suit under the Sherman Act, Lanham Act, and RICO had standing to seek a declaration that the defendant's fraudulently procured contracts were invalid
Schmier v. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
279 F.3d 817 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 302 timesHolding amendment futile where "it was not factually possible for plaintiff to amend the complaint so as to satisfy [the underlying problem]"
Glen Holly Entertainment v. Tektronix Inc.
343 F.3d 1000 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 281 timesHolding that "generalized, vague, and unspecific assertions constitute[e] mere 'puffery' upon which a reasonable consumer [cannot] rely."
Rosal v. First Federal Bank of California
671 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (N.D. Cal. 2009) Cited 198 timesHolding that foreclosing on a property pursuant to a deed of trust is not "debt collection" for purposes of the RFDCPA
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 AnalysesGranting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 92,835 times 91 Legal AnalysesFinding 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 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 71,368 times 127 Legal AnalysesHolding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 39,551 times 328 Legal AnalysesRequiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 Cited 18,122 times 315 Legal AnalysesProhibiting unlawful business practices
Section 2313 - Express warranties by affirmation, promise, description, sample
Cal. Com. Code § 2313 Cited 372 times 1 Legal AnalysesStating that an express warranty is a "promise made by the seller to the buyer which relates to the goods"