Legal Opinion
Taylor v. Quall
District Court, C.D. California
Decided September 25, 2006No. CV06-5366PA(MANX)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ANDERSON, District Judge.
Proceedings: IN CHAMBERS — COURT ORDER
Before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss the Second and Third Claims for Relief in the plaintiffs Complaint filed by defendants Matthew W. Quail, Lang, Ritchert & Patch, and Unifund CCR Partners (collectively, “Defendants”). (Docket No. 9.) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78 and Local Rule 7-15, the Court finds that this matter is appropriate for decision without oral argument. The hearing calendared for September 25, 2006 is vacated, and the matter taken off calendar.
I. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS & PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Accordi…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Hishon v. King & SpaldingSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Parks School of Business, Inc., Dba Parks College, a New Mexico Corporation v. Fife Symington Roy A. Nicholson Sally HeinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Heintz v. JenkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Komarova v. National Credit Acceptance, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Huy Thanh Vo v. Nelson & KennardDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2013
- Lopez-Reyes v. Kenosian & Miele, LLPDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2007
- Johnson v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK DBA CHASE MANHATT.District Court, E.D. California · 2008
- Butler v. Resurgence Financial, LLCDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2007
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.