§Why CasetextPricing

The A Star Group, LLC v. Manitoba Hydro et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 24 MOTION to Dismiss Notice of KPMG LLP

16 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 263,882 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 277,112 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

  3. Faiveley Transp. v. Wabtec Corp.

    559 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2009)   Cited 542 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where "information concerning customer preferences and ordering patterns could easily be . . . obtained by contacting those customers directly," that information could not be deemed a trade secret

  4. Softel, Inc. v. Dragon Med. Scien. Comm

    118 F.3d 955 (2d Cir. 1997)   Cited 556 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding third Outley factor favored exclusion of untimely expert report offered by plaintiff where "the excluded testimony was expert testimony" and any differences between the parties' expert opinions "would have redrawn the boundaries of the case and almost certainly have prejudiced [the defendant's] ability to meet [the plaintiff's] attack"

  5. Sharma v. Skaarup Ship Management Corp.

    916 F.2d 820 (2d Cir. 1990)   Cited 193 times
    Holding that to state a claim for tortious interference with contractual relations, a plaintiff must also show that “but for” the actions of the defendant, the contract would have been completed

  6. Ritani, LLC v. Aghjayan

    880 F. Supp. 2d 425 (S.D.N.Y. 2012)   Cited 63 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that likelihood of confusion was adequately pleaded based on defendant's intentional use of and association with plaintiff's "Ritani" mark in marketing materials

  7. Krys v. Aaron (In re Refco Inc. Sec. Litig.)

    826 F. Supp. 2d 478 (S.D.N.Y. 2011)   Cited 63 times
    Finding it insufficient for pleading intent to procure breach that "defendant engaged in wrongful conduct that had the effect of impairing a plaintiff's contract"

  8. Wolff v. Rare Medium, Inc.

    210 F. Supp. 2d 490 (S.D.N.Y. 2002)   Cited 75 times
    Explaining that when pleading breach of contract, "a plaintiff must identify the specific provision of the contract that was breached"

  9. Ferring B.V. v. Allergan, Inc.

    932 F. Supp. 2d 493 (S.D.N.Y. 2013)   Cited 24 times
    Holding New York law conversion claims barred by statute of limitations and the demand-and-refusal rule inapplicable because plaintiff pled that the acquisition was unlawful

  10. Purvi Enterprises v. City of New York

    62 A.D.3d 508 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 26 times

    Nos. 564, 565, 565A. May 14, 2009. Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles E. Ramos, J.), entered July 3, 2008, which (1) denied plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction and granted defendant 3206 Emmons Avenue Realty, LLC's cross motion to dismiss the complaint as against it, and (2) granted Howard Hornstein and Cozen O'Connor, EC's cross motion to dismiss the complaint as against them and sua sponte dismissed the complaint as against defendant City

  11. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 162,307 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."