Legal Opinion
Hargrove & Constanzo v. Commissioner
District Court, E.D. California
Decided September 23, 2006No. Civ-F-06-0046 AWI DLBPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER RE: MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTERCLAIM
ISHII, District Judge.
This case is before the court on Plaintiffs motion to dismiss the counterclaim, asserting the cause of action is barred by statute of limitations and the counterclaim fails to plead fraud with the specificity required by Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 9(b). Doc. 16. Defendants filed a timely opposition contesting both assertions. Doc. 19. Plaintiff filed a timely reply. Doc. 20. The matter was taken under submission without oral argument.
I. History
Between December 1995 and April 2000, the law firm of Hargrove & Costanzo, through general…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Jenkins v. McKeithenSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Lee v. City Of Los AngelesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Hospital Building Co. v. Trustees of Rex HospitalSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- County of Kern v. Tyler Technologies, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2021