§Why CasetextPricing

Townsend Farms Inc. v. Goknur Gida Maddeleri Enerji Imalat Ithalat Ihracat Ticaret VE Sanayi A.S., et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Amended Consolidated Complaint

44 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. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co. v. Campbell

    538 U.S. 408 (2003)   Cited 2,729 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an award of $145 million in punitive damages on a $1 million compensatory verdict violated due process

  3. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,322 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

  4. Ramirez v. Cnty. of San Bernardino

    806 F.3d 1002 (9th Cir. 2015)   Cited 1,066 times
    Holding that district court should have deemed motion to dismiss moot after the complaint it applied to was amended

  5. 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

  6. Soule v. General Motors Corp.

    8 Cal.4th 548 (Cal. 1994)   Cited 1,270 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the consumer expectations test was not appropriate for a claim that a car was defective because the wheel assembly detached in accident

  7. Porter v. Jones

    319 F.3d 483 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 930 times
    Finding it permissible to consider allegations that were "rooted in past events" when the relief sought was prospective

  8. Robinson Helicopter Co. v. Dana Corp.

    34 Cal.4th 979 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 766 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding the "narrow" exception to the economic loss rule is "limited to a defendant's affirmative misrepresentations on which a plaintiff relies and which expose a plaintiff to liability for personal damages."

  9. Neilson v. Union Bank of California, N.A.

    290 F. Supp. 2d 1101 (C.D. Cal. 2003)   Cited 704 times
    Holding that plaintiffs could prevail if they could prove at trial that certain transfers made pursuant to a Ponzi scheme were made within the limitations period of California's UFTA

  10. Erlich v. Menezes

    21 Cal.4th 543 (Cal. 1999)   Cited 478 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a defendant may not be liable for negligent breach of contract

  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 357,835 times   950 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 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. . . ."

  13. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,880 times   331 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  14. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,266 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  15. Section 17500 - Untrue or misleading advertising

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500   Cited 2,744 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Requiring action that originated in California to effect consumers in another state

  16. Section 1791.1 - Implied warranty of merchantability; implied warranty of fitness

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1791.1   Cited 311 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Extending express warranty remedies to implied warranty

  17. Section 875 - Right of contribution

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 875   Cited 190 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing that a "right of contribution may be enforced only after one tortfeasor has, by payment, discharged the joint judgment or has paid more than his pro rata share thereof"

  18. Section 6 - Existing right to certificate

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6   Cited 40 times

    All persons who, at the time this code goes into effect, are entitled to a certificate under any act repealed by this code, are thereby entitled to a certificate under the provisions of this code so far as the provisions of this code are applicable. Ca. Bus. and Prof'l. Code § 6 Enacted by Stats. 1937, Ch. 399.

  19. Section 876 - Pro rata share of each tortfeasor judgment debtor

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 876   Cited 28 times

    (a) The pro rata share of each tortfeasor judgment debtor shall be determined by dividing the entire judgment equally among all of them. (b) Where one or more persons are held liable solely for the tort of one of them or of another, as in the case of the liability of a master for the tort of his servant, they shall contribute a single pro rata share, as to which there may be indemnity between them. Ca. Civ. Proc. Code § 876 Added by Stats. 1957, Ch. 1700.