§Why CasetextPricing

Smith v. Franklin/Templeton Distributors, Inc. et al

Reply Memorandum re MOTION to Dismiss ; Memorandum in Support

13 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,360 times   279 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. Alexander v. Sandoval

    532 U.S. 275 (2001)   Cited 2,627 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding that it is "beyond dispute" that banning discrimination " ‘on the ground of race’ " "prohibits only intentional discrimination"

  3. Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis

    444 U.S. 11 (1979)   Cited 1,332 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Congress did not provide a private right of action for § 80b-6 because the statute expressly provided other means of enforcing compliance with its terms

  4. Berckeley Inv. Group, Ltd. v. Colkitt

    455 F.3d 195 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 1,216 times
    Holding that an expert witness is prohibited from rendering a legal opinion because it would usurp the District Court's pivotal role in explaining the law to the jury

  5. Northstar Financial Adv. v. Schwab Invest

    615 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2010)   Cited 51 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming dismissal of claims under Sections 1, 33, and 44 of the ICA because the statutes lack rights of private enforcement

  6. S.E.C. v. Treadway

    430 F. Supp. 2d 293 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)   Cited 43 times
    Holding that a witness's testimony was permitted under Rule 701 because the witness whose declaration "was more akin to a summary document than an expert analysis" was "simply an SEC employee providing his view of the facts as a summary of certain evidence and as an aid to the Court"

  7. Flaxel v. Johnson

    541 F. Supp. 2d 1127 (S.D. Cal. 2008)   Cited 11 times

    (LEAD) CASE NO. 05CV1259 JLS (WMC); (CONSOLIDATED) CASE NO. 05CV1404 JLS (WMC). January 25, 2008. R. Patrick McCullogh, McCullogh Associates, La Jolla, CA, for Plaintiffs. Matthew A. Becker, The Law Offices of Matthew A. Becker, PC, Coronado, CA, W. Allen Vaughn, Vaughn and Campbell, Tulsa, OK, for Defendants. ORDER (1) GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART GEORGE ART BISHOP'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, (2) GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART JOHN FLAXEL'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT

  8. Ante v. Office Depot Business Services

    641 F. Supp. 2d 906 (N.D. Cal. 2009)   Cited 3 times

    No. C 09-00752 WHA. June 15, 2009. John B. McMorrow, Law Offices of John B. McMorrow a Professional Corporation, Fremont, CA, for Plaintiff. Martin H. Orlick, Jeffer Mangels Butler Marmaro LLP, San Francisco, CA, Louise Ann Fernandez, Jeffer Mangels Butler Marmaro LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Daniel F. Katz, David S. Kurtzer-Ellenbogen, Williams Connolly LLP, Washington, DC, for Defendant Office Depot Business Services a Corporation. ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND WILLIAM ALSUP, District

  9. SMITH v. FRANKLIN/TEMPLETON DISTRIBUTORS, INC.

    No. C 09-4775 PJH (N.D. Cal. Jun. 8, 2010)   Cited 1 times

    No. C 09-4775 PJH. June 8, 2010 ORDER PHYLLIS HAMILTON, District Judge Defendants' motion to dismiss the above-entitled action came on for hearing before this court on April 14, 2010. Plaintiff appeared by his counsel Michael C. Spencer; defendant Franklin/Templeton Distributors, Inc. appeared by its counsel Daniel A. Pollack; and the defendant Trustees appeared by their counsel Mark Holland. Having read the parties' papers and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority

  10. Section 80a-35 - Breach of fiduciary duty

    15 U.S.C. § 80a-35   Cited 310 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Imposing a “fiduciary duty with respect to the receipt of compensation for services, or of payments of a material nature ”

  11. Section 80a-46 - Validity of contracts

    15 U.S.C. § 80a-46   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing a remedy in the event that "a contract described in paragraph has been performed"

  12. Section 80a-51 - Short title

    15 U.S.C. § 80a-51

    This subchapter may be cited as the "Investment Company Act of 1940". 15 U.S.C. § 80a-51 Aug. 22, 1940, ch. 686, title I, §52, 54 Stat. 847. STATUTORY NOTES AND RELATED SUBSIDIARIES SHORT TITLE OF 2018 AMENDMENT Pub. L. 115-141, div. S, title VIII, §801, Mar. 23, 2018, 132 Stat. 1138, provided that: "This title [amending sections 80a-56, 80a-60, 80a-62, and 80b-5 of this title and enacting provisions set out as a note under under section 80a-53 of this title] may be cited as the 'Small Business Credit

  13. Section 270.38a-1 - Compliance procedures and practices of certain investment companies

    17 C.F.R. § 270.38a-1   Cited 7 times   7 Legal Analyses

    (a) Each registered investment company and business development company ("fund") must: (1)Policies and procedures. Adopt and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violation of the Federal Securities Laws by the fund, including policies and procedures that provide for the oversight of compliance by each investment adviser, principal underwriter, administrator, and transfer agent of the fund; (2)Board approval. Obtain the approval of the fund's board of directors