§Why CasetextPricing

Kilty, Pamela et al v. Weyerhaeuser Company et al

Brief in Opposition

31 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 275,105 times   368 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

  2. Gibson v. City of Chicago

    910 F.2d 1510 (7th Cir. 1990)   Cited 2,980 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the actions of an officer who has no authority whatsoever to act" are outside the ambit of § 1983

  3. McMillan v. Collection Professionals Inc.

    455 F.3d 754 (7th Cir. 2006)   Cited 360 times
    Holding that a plaintiff's claims under §§ 1692e and 1692f based on the same collection letter should not be dismissed

  4. Thomas v. Mallett

    2005 WI 129 (Wis. 2005)   Cited 77 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Rejecting distinction based on purported existence of other remedies, because those remedies are limited at best and do not absolve the manufacturers

  5. Alvarado v. Sersch

    2003 WI 55 (Wis. 2003)   Cited 80 times
    In Alvarado, 262 Wis. 2d 74, ¶ 27, a majority of this court recently rejected the assertion of the defendant landlord that it did not owe a duty to exercise reasonable care to a janitorial employee who was injured while cleaning an apartment, noting "everyone owes a duty of ordinary care to all persons."

  6. Sopha v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation

    230 Wis. 2d 212 (Wis. 1999)   Cited 86 times
    Holding that "a person who brings an action based on a diagnosis of a non-malignant asbestos-related condition may bring a subsequent action upon a later diagnosis of a distinct malignant asbestos-related condition"

  7. Bell v. Cheswick Generating Station, Genon Power Midwest, L.P.

    734 F.3d 188 (3d Cir. 2013)   Cited 52 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is "no meaningful distinction between the [savings clauses found in the] Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act"

  8. Metropolitan Sewerage Dis. v. Milwaukee

    2005 WI 8 (Wis. 2005)   Cited 66 times
    Holding that "municipality is immune from suit for nuisance if the nuisance is predicated on negligent acts that are discretionary in nature" but not when "negligence is comprised of acts performed pursuant to a ministerial duty"

  9. Physicians Plus v. Midwest Mut

    2002 WI 80 (Wis. 2002)   Cited 49 times
    Concluding that to defeat summary judgment there must be a genuine issue of material fact apparent in the affidavits submitted

  10. Melendrez v. Ameron International Corporation

    240 Cal.App.4th 632 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 26 times
    In Melendrez, the plaintiff was exposed to asbestos during the course of his employment with Ameron International Corporation.

  11. Section 7604 - Citizen suits

    42 U.S.C. § 7604   Cited 880 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts limited jurisdiction "to compel (consistent with paragraph (2) of this section) agency action unreasonably delayed ..."

  12. Section 102.03 - Conditions of liability

    Wis. Stat. § 102.03   Cited 162 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring the employee to sustain an injury during the course of her employment

  13. Section 7661a - Permit programs

    42 U.S.C. § 7661a   Cited 112 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Articulating ten minimum elements for state programs

  14. Section 895.043 - Punitive damages

    Wis. Stat. § 895.043   Cited 98 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Considering wealth of a defendant in setting punitive damages award

  15. Section 7661 - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 7661   Cited 85 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating 42 U.S.C. § 7412 (CAA § 112); 42 U.S.C. § 7602(j) (CAA § 302 or part D of Title I)

  16. Section 893.52 - Action for damages for injury to property

    Wis. Stat. § 893.52   Cited 54 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating a six-year statute of limitations for non-contractual actions related to damage to property