Legal Opinion
Tatum v. Oberg
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided September 3, 2009No. Civil Action 3:08-CV-1251 (JCH)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING RE: DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 78)
JANET C. HALL, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff, Gary Tatum (“Tatum”), brings this action against defendants, Mary Christina Oberg (“Oberg”) and Ford, Oberg, Manion & Houck, P.C. (“FOMH”), for damages he allegedly sustained from the defendants’ representation of Tatum in an action to dissolve Tatum’s marriage to Kathleen J. Murphy (“Murphy”). Tatum asserts state law causes of action for fraud, breach of contract and malpractice, and under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”). Oberg and FOMH move the court under…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co. v. Red Cab Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Davis v. SchererSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Quinn v. Walgreen Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 2013
- Dukes v. N.Y.C. Employees' Ret. Sys.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 2019
- Nwachukwu v. Liberty BankDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2017
- Smith v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2016
- In re Trilegiant Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2014
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.