Varnado v. Midland Funding LLC
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [DOCKET NO. 15]
DONNA M. RYU, United States Magistrate Judge
Defendants Midland Credit Management, Inc. (“MCM”) and Midland Funding, LLC (“MF”) (collectively, “Midland”) have filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). [Docket No. 15.] Midland seeks dismissal of Plaintiff Karen Varnado’s state law causes of action for negligence and intru*988sion upon seclusion, and Plaintiffs requests for punitive damages and declaratory and injunctive relief under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act…
2Cases cited33 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Navarro v. BlockCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Williams v. Facebook, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
- Barefield v. HSBC Holdings PLCDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2018
- CS Wang & Assoc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.District Court, E.D. Illinois · 2018
- Alapati v. City and County of San FranciscoDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022
- Beatty v. PHH Mortgage CorporationDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2019
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.