Legal Opinion

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Parrish

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided December 29, 1994No. 93CA1337PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge BRIGGS.

Plaintiff, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm), appeals *287the trial court’s dismissal of five of its claims for relief in its third amended complaint against defendants, Michael Parrish, Parrish Chiropractic Centers, P.C., Robert C. Ozer, and Robert C. Ozer, P.C., for failing to plead fraud with the particularity required by C.R.C.P. 9(b). We affirm.

I

State Farm filed an amended complaint asserting nine claims for relief. Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings for failure to comply with C.R.C.P. 9(b). In dismissing the complaint the trial…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,590 David Segal v. Lawrence Gordon, and Coburn Corporation of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
  2. William B. Scheidt and Wanda C. Scheidt v. William Randolph KleinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
  3. Christidis v. First Pennsylvania Mortgage TrustCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1983
  4. Zucker v. KatzDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
  5. Creech v. Federal Land Bank of WichitaDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1986

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Coroles v. SabeyCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2003
  2. HealthONE of Denver, Inc. v. UnitedHealth Group Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 2011
  3. Baker v. Wood, Ris & Hames, Professional Corp.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2016
  4. Silver v. Colorado Casualty Insurance Co.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009
  5. v. DIA Brewing CoSupreme Court of Colorado · 2021

8 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