§Why CasetextPricing

Regan v. Schindler Elevator Corporation

MEMORANDUM in Support re MOTION to Dismiss

27 Cited authorities

  1. Cancer Foundation v. Cerberus Capital Mgmt

    559 F.3d 671 (7th Cir. 2009)   Cited 437 times
    Holding that period “begins to run when the plaintiffs discover, or should, if diligent, have discovered, that they had been injured by the defendants ”

  2. RodrÍguez v. Municipality of San Juan

    659 F.3d 168 (1st Cir. 2011)   Cited 263 times
    Holding that arguments "adverted to in a cursory fashion, unaccompanied by developed argument," are waived

  3. Riley v. Presnell

    409 Mass. 239 (Mass. 1991)   Cited 300 times
    Holding that it is only necessary that a plaintiff have notice of their injury and notice of the cause of that injury in order for a cause of action to begin to accrue

  4. Coons v. Industrial Knife Co., Inc.

    620 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2010)   Cited 136 times
    Holding that plaintiff forfeited Rule 15(c) argument by not raising it in opposition to defendant's post-judgment motion and that it could not "be ‘resurrected on appeal’ " (internal quotes and cites omitted)

  5. Harrington v. Costello

    467 Mass. 720 (Mass. 2014)   Cited 94 times
    Relying on Friedman v. Jablonksi, supra

  6. Wilson v. U.S. Government

    23 F.3d 559 (1st Cir. 1994)   Cited 117 times
    Finding the plaintiff did not exercise due diligence and rejecting his request to toll the statute of limitations where the plaintiff was unaware that the United States owned the ship at issue but could easily have determined this through "routine discovery"

  7. McGuinness v. Cotter

    412 Mass. 617 (Mass. 1992)   Cited 114 times
    In McGuinness, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ("SJC") held that where a mother had no notice that her son's cerebral palsy might have been caused by medical malpractice, the fact that such cause was contemplated in a doctor's report that she never saw did not trigger the statute of limitations.

  8. Morel v. DaimlerChrysler AG

    565 F.3d 20 (1st Cir. 2009)   Cited 68 times
    Holding that "Rule 15(c) applies in a diversity case notwithstanding the incidence of a more restrictive state rule"

  9. Bridge v. U.S. Parole Com'n

    981 F.2d 97 (3d Cir. 1992)   Cited 104 times
    Discussing general exceptions to law of case doctrine

  10. Albrecht v. Clifford

    436 Mass. 706 (Mass. 2002)   Cited 73 times
    Adopting the implied warranty of habitability for the sale of new homes by builder-vendors

  11. 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 346,241 times   923 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 90,629 times   91 Legal Analyses
    Finding 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

  13. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 69,090 times   122 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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

  14. Section 260:2A - Three years; actions of tort, contract to recover for personal injuries and replevin

    Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260 § 2A   Cited 583 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Establishing three-year statute of limitations for tort claims

  15. Section 260:32 - Proceedings upon failure of original action; general provisions

    Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 260 § 32   Cited 55 times
    Providing one year to file a new action following a dismissal "for any matter of form."