Legal Opinion
Terrill v. ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC.
District Court, S.D. Georgia
Decided September 3, 2010No. CV 108-030PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
LISA GODBEY WOOD, Chief Judge.
Presently before the Court are Electrolux’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 79), Electrolux’s Motion to Partially Strike Class Allegations (Dkt. No. 87), and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification (Dkt. No. 97). Electrolux’s Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Partially Strike Class Allegations are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification is DENIED.
I. Background
The following factual allegations are taken directly from Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint, and assumed to be true for purposes of Electrolux’s Motion to Dismiss.…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2012
- Garcia v. Chrysler Group LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- In re Rust-Oleum Restore Marketing, Sales Practices & Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
- Amin v. Mercedes-Benz United States, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 2018
- Parm v. National Bank of California, N.A.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2017
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.