Legal Opinion
Burnett v. Conseco, Inc.
District Court, N.D. California
Decided April 9, 2015No. Case No. 10-md-02124-SI; Individual Case No. C 12-5906 SIPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Re: Dkt. Nos. 639, 642, 657
SUSAN ILLSTON, District Judge
Defendants Conseco Life, CNO Financial Group, Inc., CDOC, Inc., and CNO Services, LLC have moved to dismiss the amended complaint in this putative class action, based on failure to state a claim and lack of personal jurisdiction. Docket Nos. 639, 642. Plaintiffs William Burnett and Joe Camp have filed oppositions, to which defendants have replied. Plaintiffs have also moved for sanctions. Docket No. 657. These motions came on for hearing on March…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lopez v. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Chambers v. Nasco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lofton v. Verizon Wireless (VAW) LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015
- In re Dexilant (Dexlansoprazole) Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2026
- United States, ex rel. v. T L Peterson, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019