§Why CasetextPricing

Plascencia et al v. Lending 1st Mortgage et al

Memorandum in Opposition to EMC's Motion to Dismiss

86 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 276,716 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

  2. Swartz v. KPMG LLP

    476 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 2,933 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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”

  3. Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc.

    24 Cal.4th 317 (Cal. 2000)   Cited 3,301 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an implied covenant "cannot be endowed with an existence independent of its contractual underpinnings. It cannot impose substantive duties or limits on the contracting parties beyond those incorporated in the specific terms of their agreement."

  4. Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

    29 Cal.4th 1134 (Cal. 2003)   Cited 1,692 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiff cannot recover damages under Cal. Bus. Prof. Code § 17200 unless plaintiff has "an ownership interest in the money it seeks to recover"

  5. Cook, Perkiss Liehe v. N.C. Collection Serv

    911 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 2,283 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an advertisement that "impl[ies] lower rates and better services than those of a competitor . . . constitutes puffery and is not actionable as false advertising"

  6. Lazar v. Superior Court

    12 Cal.4th 631 (Cal. 1996)   Cited 1,686 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that justifiable reliance is a required element of a fraud claim

  7. In re Glenfed, Inc. Securities Litigation

    42 F.3d 1541 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 1,724 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs may not "merely proclaim in the most conclusory of fashion that the defendants made false statements."

  8. Moore v. Kayport Package Exp., Inc.

    885 F.2d 531 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 1,877 times
    Holding that a complaint did not satisfy Rule 9(b) because it "d[id] not specify which plaintiff received which prospectus, or which plaintiff made purchases through the stockbroker defendants"

  9. Nagrampa v. Mailcoups, Inc.

    469 F.3d 1257 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 971 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an arbitration agreement that was invalid due to unconscionability was not enforceable

  10. Bly-Magee v. California

    236 F.3d 1014 (9th Cir. 2001)   Cited 1,179 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding leave to amend should have been "freely given" pursuant to Rule 15 even though plaintiff failed in first amended complaint to plead fraud with specificity required by Rule 9(b)

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 162,084 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 39,880 times   331 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  13. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 29,431 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  14. Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,519 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

  15. Section 1640 - Civil liability

    15 U.S.C. § 1640   Cited 4,967 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "any creditor who fails to comply" liable, with creditors defined within § 1602(g) as persons

  16. Section 1635 - Right of rescission as to certain transactions

    15 U.S.C. § 1635   Cited 3,336 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Granting consumers the right to rescind

  17. Section 1464 - Federal savings associations

    12 U.S.C. § 1464   Cited 962 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Granting broad authority to Office of Thrift Supervision to issue regulations governing thrifts

  18. Section 1654 - Interpretation against party causing uncertainty

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1654   Cited 678 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Codifying the doctrine of contra proferentem

  19. Section 17208 - Statute of limitations

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17208   Cited 640 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Governing UCL claims

  20. Section 1610 - Effect on other laws

    15 U.S.C. § 1610   Cited 154 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Allowing states to regulate consumer credit charges

  21. Section 226.23 - Right of rescission

    12 C.F.R. § 226.23   Cited 1,221 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Granting extended right to cancel to "consumers" in the event of nondisclosures