Legal Opinion

Hale v. Norcold Incorporated

District Court, D. Arizona

Decided August 5, 2019No. 2:18-cv-03597Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 Suzann e Hale, et al., ) No. CV-18-03597-PHX-SPL ) 9 ) 10 Plaintiffs, ) ORDER vs. ) ) 11 ) Norcold Incorporated, et al., ) 12 ) 13 Defendants. ) ) 14 ) 15 Before the Court is Norcold Incorporated, Thetford Corporation, and Dyson-Kissner- 16 Moran Corporation (together, the “Defendants”) Motion to Dismiss Fraudulent 17 Concealment Claim and to Dismiss Complaint Pursuant to Rule 8, or Alternatively, Motion 18 to Strike (the “Motion”). (Doc. 5) The Motion was fully briefed on November 27, 2018. 19 (Docs. 12, 14) The…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  3. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  4. Jena Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Department Al Olsen, Police Chief, Individually and as a Police AgentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
  5. Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API