§Why CasetextPricing

Whalen v. Ford Motor Company

RESPONSE

145 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. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 265,336 times   364 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  3. Cousins v. Lockyer

    568 F.3d 1063 (9th Cir. 2009)   Cited 1,350 times
    Holding that "state departmental regulations do not establish a federal constitutional violation."

  4. In re Tobacco II Cases

    46 Cal.4th 298 (Cal. 2009)   Cited 1,202 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Holding class representatives had standing to challenge common marketing of cigarettes despite differences in the advertisements or statements on which class members relied

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

    911 F.2d 242 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 2,207 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. Clemens v. DaimlerChrysler Corp.

    530 F.3d 852 (9th Cir. 2008)   Cited 909 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "claims under the Magnuson–Moss Act stand or fall with express and implied warranty claims under state law"

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

    885 F.2d 531 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 1,829 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"

  8. Wilson v. Hewlett–Packard Co.

    668 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 780 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a defendant has not made an affirmative misrepresentation, a plaintiff must allege the existence of an unreasonable safety hazard and a causal connection between the defect and the hazard

  9. Sonnier v. State Farm Mutual

    509 F.3d 673 (5th Cir. 2007)   Cited 622 times
    In Sonnier v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 509 F.3d 673 (5th Cir. 2007), for example, plaintiffs had alleged that the insurance company had a duty to inspect the seatbelts after an accident.

  10. Giles v. General Motors Accep

    494 F.3d 865 (9th Cir. 2007)   Cited 410 times
    Holding that the economic loss doctrine "does not bar recovery in tort where the defendant had a duty imposed by law rather than by contract and where the defendant's intentional breach of that duty caused purely monetary harm to the plaintiff"

  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 344,399 times   920 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 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 38,818 times   316 Legal Analyses
    Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

  13. Section 2301 - Definitions

    15 U.S.C. § 2301   Cited 2,510 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Including as consumers those entitled to enforce a warranty "under applicable State law"

  14. Section 2310 - Remedies in consumer disputes

    15 U.S.C. § 2310   Cited 1,599 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Permitting recovery of "a sum equal to the aggregate amount of cost and expenses (including attorneys’ fees based on actual time expended)"

  15. Section 2314 - Implied warranty: merchantability; usage of trade

    Cal. Com. Code § 2314   Cited 319 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Adopting and codifying Uniform Commercial Code § 2-314

  16. Section 17.565 - Limitation

    Tex. Bus. & Com. Code § 17.565   Cited 285 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Establishing DTPA’s two-year limitations period

  17. Section 2-719 - Contractual Modification or Limitation of Remedy

    N.Y. U.C.C. Law § 2-719   Cited 122 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Permitting limitation of remedy to repair or replacement

  18. Section 1791.2 - Express warranty

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1791.2   Cited 110 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Defining "express warranty" as " written statement arising out of a sale to the consumer of a consumer good pursuant to which the manufacturer, distributor, or retailer undertakes to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the consumer good or to provide compensation if there is a failure in utility or performance"

  19. Section 12A:2-719 - Contractual modification or limitation of remedy

    N.J. Stat. § 12A:2-719   Cited 70 times
    Concerning contractual modification and limitation of remedies

  20. Section 1302.93 - Contractual modification or limitation of remedy - UCC 2-719

    Ohio Rev. Code § 1302.93   Cited 65 times
    Permitting the seller to limit the buyer's remedies to repair or replacement of the defective product