Legal Opinion

Clancy v. Bromley Tea Co.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided August 9, 2013No. Case No. 12-cv-03003-JSTPublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND MOTION TO STRIKE, AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY DISCOVERY

JON S. TIGAR, United States District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Tony Clancy (“Clancy”), on behalf of himself and a proposed class of similarly situated individuals, has filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants Bromley Tea Company, Eastern Tea Corp., London Holding Company, Inc., Bromley Products Corp., and several individuals (collectively “Bromley”). ECF No. 17. Brom-ley has filed a motion for judgment on the…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  4. Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  5. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 2011

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

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. In re Carrier IQ, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
  2. Catalano v. BMW of North America, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2016
  3. Frenzel v. AliphcomDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
  4. In re Rust-Oleum Restore Marketing, Sales Practices & Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
  5. Zeiger v. Wellpet LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2018

33 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