This document is a memorandum and order from a United States District Court case involving claims brought by plaintiffs against defendants related to two books co-authored and authored by Greg Mortenson. The plaintiffs allege that the books, which were marketed and sold as nonfiction, contained fabrications. The court provides background on the plaintiffs, defendants, books in question, and procedural history of the case. It then discusses the standards for evaluating motions to dismiss under Rules 8, 9, and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Finally, the court analyzes the plaintiffs' twelve asserted causes of action.
This document is a court order from a United States District Court case between Michele Reinhart, Dan Donovan, Deborah Netter and others against Greg Mortenson, David Oliver Relin, Penguin Group (USA) and others. The order grants the plaintiffs' motion to file a fourth amended complaint and to drop and add parties. It denies the plaintiffs' motion for preservation of documents, finding the defendants are already aware of their duty to preserve evidence. It also denies all other pending motions as moot without prejudice to renew them appropriately.
Sample California request for production of documents LegalDocsPro
This sample California request for production of documents is sent pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.010, et seq. This sample is used to request an opposing party to produce specified documents that support their claims or defenses.
This is a preview of the sample document sold by LegalDocsPro on scribd.com
This case involves a dispute over insurance proceeds from an automobile accident settlement. Plaintiff Glenn Cody received $25,000 from the insurer of the at-fault driver, but had over $29,500 in medical expenses. Defendant MILA paid $17,632.18 of Plaintiff's medical expenses and asserts an equitable lien over the settlement funds. Plaintiff disputes the validity of MILA's lien. Plaintiff was also insured by Defendant Farm Bureau, which provided $25,000 in UM coverage, but disputes its applicability. The Court must determine the validity of MILA's lien to then address potential liability of Farm Bureau.
Federal Court Denying Motion by Satish Vuppalapati, Madhavi Vuppalapati and A...mh37o
Federal court denied the motion by Satish Vuppalapati, Madhavi Vuppalapati and Anandhan Jayaraman. Court confirmed that PISL India and PISl PA are one and the same companies.
First Natl Acceptance Co. v. City of Utica_12-cv-01622-0[1]James Evans
This case concerns the demolition of an apartment building owned by John Gosnell in Utica, New York. First National Acceptance Company held a mortgage on the property. The City of Utica inspected the building and issued notices of violations to Gosnell, but did not notify First National or follow certain statutory procedures. First National claims the demolition violated its due process rights. The court will determine if issues of material fact exist regarding whether Utica followed applicable laws in declaring the building unsafe and ordering its demolition.
Doc962 freeman group motion compromise & settlement_ a walk-awaymalp2009
The Trustee filed a motion seeking court approval of a compromise and settlement agreement between the Trustee and the Freeman Parties. The agreement provides that Robert Freeman and David Ward will withdraw their respective $92,500 proof of claims against the estate with prejudice, and the Trustee will dismiss the Freeman Parties from an adversary proceeding. The agreement achieves a walk-away settlement and full mutual release of claims between the parties. The Trustee believes the settlement is in the best interest of creditors and the estate by avoiding substantial time and costs of litigation, despite believing there are good objections to the proof of claims.
This document is a court order from a United States District Court case between Michele Reinhart, Dan Donovan, Deborah Netter and others against Greg Mortenson, David Oliver Relin, Penguin Group (USA) and others. The order grants the plaintiffs' motion to file a fourth amended complaint and to drop and add parties. It denies the plaintiffs' motion for preservation of documents, finding the defendants are already aware of their duty to preserve evidence. It also denies all other pending motions as moot without prejudice to renew them appropriately.
Sample California request for production of documents LegalDocsPro
This sample California request for production of documents is sent pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.010, et seq. This sample is used to request an opposing party to produce specified documents that support their claims or defenses.
This is a preview of the sample document sold by LegalDocsPro on scribd.com
This case involves a dispute over insurance proceeds from an automobile accident settlement. Plaintiff Glenn Cody received $25,000 from the insurer of the at-fault driver, but had over $29,500 in medical expenses. Defendant MILA paid $17,632.18 of Plaintiff's medical expenses and asserts an equitable lien over the settlement funds. Plaintiff disputes the validity of MILA's lien. Plaintiff was also insured by Defendant Farm Bureau, which provided $25,000 in UM coverage, but disputes its applicability. The Court must determine the validity of MILA's lien to then address potential liability of Farm Bureau.
Federal Court Denying Motion by Satish Vuppalapati, Madhavi Vuppalapati and A...mh37o
Federal court denied the motion by Satish Vuppalapati, Madhavi Vuppalapati and Anandhan Jayaraman. Court confirmed that PISL India and PISl PA are one and the same companies.
First Natl Acceptance Co. v. City of Utica_12-cv-01622-0[1]James Evans
This case concerns the demolition of an apartment building owned by John Gosnell in Utica, New York. First National Acceptance Company held a mortgage on the property. The City of Utica inspected the building and issued notices of violations to Gosnell, but did not notify First National or follow certain statutory procedures. First National claims the demolition violated its due process rights. The court will determine if issues of material fact exist regarding whether Utica followed applicable laws in declaring the building unsafe and ordering its demolition.
Doc962 freeman group motion compromise & settlement_ a walk-awaymalp2009
The Trustee filed a motion seeking court approval of a compromise and settlement agreement between the Trustee and the Freeman Parties. The agreement provides that Robert Freeman and David Ward will withdraw their respective $92,500 proof of claims against the estate with prejudice, and the Trustee will dismiss the Freeman Parties from an adversary proceeding. The agreement achieves a walk-away settlement and full mutual release of claims between the parties. The Trustee believes the settlement is in the best interest of creditors and the estate by avoiding substantial time and costs of litigation, despite believing there are good objections to the proof of claims.
This sample declaration for California can be modified for use in any case in California. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
'Madhavi Vuppalpati & Anandhan Jayaraman defeated in their attempt to derail ...mh37o
Madhavi Vuppalpati and her husband Anandhan Jayaraman are defeated in their attempt to derail the trial in Washington Court with this denial by Hon Madam Justice Marsha j. Pechman
One of the many documents out and coming out that will show how it works. Garbage & Wilk circle the wagons and getting ready to cut Darren Meade adrift.
This document is an order from a United States District Court regarding cross-motions for summary judgment in a case involving a plaintiff who was imprisoned at a halfway house operated by the defendant. The court provides background on the case, including that the plaintiff sued over alleged unlawful seizure of his property and constitutional violations. The court evaluates the motions using the standard for summary judgment, granting the defendant's motion and denying the plaintiff's motion.
Aclutx teen jail fine unconst darren chakerDarren Chaker
The document describes a court order ruling on various motions in a civil rights lawsuit brought by Francisco De Luna and Elizabeth Diaz against Hidalgo County, Texas and several justices of the peace. It provides background on the plaintiffs' claims that they were unlawfully jailed for failure to pay fines from previous misdemeanor offenses due to lack of determination of their indigency. The court order addresses cross motions for summary judgment and class certification filed by both parties.
This document is a declaration by Richard Miyamoto in support of a judgment creditor's opposition to a debtor's motion to avoid a judicial lien. It summarizes a long legal dispute between the parties involving multiple bankruptcy filings by the debtor designed to hinder and delay collection of the judgment. It details the procedural history of the case, including previous court rulings against the debtor for failure to comply with discovery orders. Exhibits are attached documenting the lien and various court orders in the case.
Nml motion to compel 123 entities in nevadaChristian Sanz
This order grants NML Capital Ltd.'s motion to compel discovery from 123 nonparty corporations in aid of executing its judgments against Argentina. NML suspects the corporations were used to launder $65 million embezzled from Argentina. While the corporations claim no responsive documents exist, NML argues this is untrue based on an Argentine investigation report linking the corporations to the embezzlement scheme. As the corporations and their representative are beyond the court's subpoena power, compelling compliance tests the limits of the court's authority to enforce its judgments against foreign sovereign debtors.
Sample California motion to compel responses to requests for production of do...LegalDocsPro
This sample California motion to compel responses to requests for production of documents is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.300(b) and is used when a party has served requests for production of documents special interrogatories but has received NO responses or documents. The sample could easily be modified to apply to form interrogatories as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 9 pages and includes a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, a sample declaration and a proof of service by mail.
Sample small claims transfer declaration for CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample declaration for transfer of small claims case in California is filed by a Defendant under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 116.390 on the grounds that the Defendant has a claim that exceeds the jurisdiction of the small claims court and the claim relates to the contract, transaction, matter, or event which is the subject of the plaintiff’s claim. The sample also includes an order for transfer of small claims case.
James Walters Kellogg & Andelson - declaration 8.4.93jamesmaredmond
This document is a declaration by James F. Walters, a certified public accountant, in opposition to an application for a writ of attachment in a court case between City National Bank and Stephen Blanchard. Walters declares that he has served as the accountant for Blanchard and his construction company. He attended a meeting between Blanchard and the chairman of CNB to discuss the bank reneging on commitments to provide financing for one of Blanchard's real estate development projects. Walters asserts that most of the funds referenced in CNB's complaint were used by Blanchard for personal expenses rather than business purposes.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Howard K. Stern's motion to stay the mandate in the case of Elaine Marshall v. Howard K. Stern pending a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. The case involved the bankruptcy and estate of Vickie Lynn Marshall (aka Anna Nicole Smith).
Opposition to a California summary judgment motionLegalDocsPro
This sample opposition to a motion for summary judgment in California was created by a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
Sample California motion to strike complaintLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to strike portions of a complaint for California was created by a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
Caso de EliGio Cedeño contra Juan Felipe Lara FernándezInforme 25
This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case of Eligio Cedeño v. Castillo. The order affirms the district court's dismissal of Cedeño's RICO complaint against various defendants for failure to state a claim. Specifically, it finds that Cedeño's complaint alleges an extraterritorial violation of RICO that the statute does not reach based on insufficient domestic conduct. It also rejects Cedeño's arguments that his claims fit within RICO's domestic focus and that RICO incorporates extraterritorial predicate offenses. The court further finds that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Cedeño's request to amend his complaint.
This order grants summary judgment to defendant Hawaii Family Forum and defendant Fuddy, denies summary judgment for plaintiffs, and denies defendant Abercrombie's motion for summary judgment as moot. The order also denies Hawaii Family Forum's motion to dismiss defendant Abercrombie. The court finds that plaintiffs' claims that Hawaii's laws restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate due process and equal protection are foreclosed by the Supreme Court's dismissal in Baker v. Nelson. Alternatively, the court finds plaintiffs' claims fail on the merits, and that Perry v. Brown does not control this case due to differences in California and Hawaii's same-sex marriage histories. The court concludes Hawaii's laws are rationally related to legitimate government interests.
This document is a motion for a stay of the mandate pending a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. It was filed by Howard K. Stern on behalf of Vickie Lynn Marshall's estate following the 9th Circuit's denial of rehearing. The motion argues that substantial questions will be presented in the cert petition regarding the scope of bankruptcy courts' power over compulsory counterclaims. It contends the 9th Circuit's new test conflicts with other circuits and Supreme Court precedent. The declaration also asserts the petition raises important issues of bankruptcy practice that require uniformity.
Sample motion for protective order for deposition in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for a protective order for a deposition in California is filed under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure 2025.420(b) on the grounds that the moving party will suffer unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense if the court does not grant the motion for a protective order. The sample on which this preview is based is 18 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.
Sample California motion to compel attendance at deposition LegalDocsPro
This sample California motion to compel attendance at deposition and produce documents is used when a party has failed to attend a duly scheduled deposition. The motion to compel also requests sanctions and is filed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450 on the grounds that the deponent failed to appear and produce documents and failed to serve any valid objection in a timely manner. The sample on which this preview is based is 13 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample California motion for protective order regarding interrogatories LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion for a protective order regarding a set of interrogatories in a legal case. It gives notice that a party will move for a protective order on the grounds that the interrogatories exceed the limit of 35 without required declaration and some interrogatories are unduly burdensome. It also moves for monetary sanctions for failure to meet and confer in good faith to resolve the issues. The motion is made under relevant code sections and requests the protective order and sanctions be granted based on the notice, attached memorandum and declaration, and evidence presented at hearing.
Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer planned to marry on September 4, 1954. However, on the day of the wedding, Velez left Beatriz a note postponing the wedding because his mother opposed it, and then disappeared without contact. Beatriz sued Velez for damages. The court found in favor of Beatriz, ordering Velez to pay damages. Velez appealed. Ordinarily, merely breaching a marriage promise is not grounds for a lawsuit. However, in this case Velez formally planned an elaborate wedding, invited guests, and left Beatriz humiliated just before the ceremony. The court found Velez's actions unjustifiable and awarded Beatriz moral and exempl
This sample declaration for California can be modified for use in any case in California. The author is a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
'Madhavi Vuppalpati & Anandhan Jayaraman defeated in their attempt to derail ...mh37o
Madhavi Vuppalpati and her husband Anandhan Jayaraman are defeated in their attempt to derail the trial in Washington Court with this denial by Hon Madam Justice Marsha j. Pechman
One of the many documents out and coming out that will show how it works. Garbage & Wilk circle the wagons and getting ready to cut Darren Meade adrift.
This document is an order from a United States District Court regarding cross-motions for summary judgment in a case involving a plaintiff who was imprisoned at a halfway house operated by the defendant. The court provides background on the case, including that the plaintiff sued over alleged unlawful seizure of his property and constitutional violations. The court evaluates the motions using the standard for summary judgment, granting the defendant's motion and denying the plaintiff's motion.
Aclutx teen jail fine unconst darren chakerDarren Chaker
The document describes a court order ruling on various motions in a civil rights lawsuit brought by Francisco De Luna and Elizabeth Diaz against Hidalgo County, Texas and several justices of the peace. It provides background on the plaintiffs' claims that they were unlawfully jailed for failure to pay fines from previous misdemeanor offenses due to lack of determination of their indigency. The court order addresses cross motions for summary judgment and class certification filed by both parties.
This document is a declaration by Richard Miyamoto in support of a judgment creditor's opposition to a debtor's motion to avoid a judicial lien. It summarizes a long legal dispute between the parties involving multiple bankruptcy filings by the debtor designed to hinder and delay collection of the judgment. It details the procedural history of the case, including previous court rulings against the debtor for failure to comply with discovery orders. Exhibits are attached documenting the lien and various court orders in the case.
Nml motion to compel 123 entities in nevadaChristian Sanz
This order grants NML Capital Ltd.'s motion to compel discovery from 123 nonparty corporations in aid of executing its judgments against Argentina. NML suspects the corporations were used to launder $65 million embezzled from Argentina. While the corporations claim no responsive documents exist, NML argues this is untrue based on an Argentine investigation report linking the corporations to the embezzlement scheme. As the corporations and their representative are beyond the court's subpoena power, compelling compliance tests the limits of the court's authority to enforce its judgments against foreign sovereign debtors.
Sample California motion to compel responses to requests for production of do...LegalDocsPro
This sample California motion to compel responses to requests for production of documents is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 2031.300(b) and is used when a party has served requests for production of documents special interrogatories but has received NO responses or documents. The sample could easily be modified to apply to form interrogatories as well. The sample on which this preview is based is 9 pages and includes a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, a sample declaration and a proof of service by mail.
Sample small claims transfer declaration for CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample declaration for transfer of small claims case in California is filed by a Defendant under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 116.390 on the grounds that the Defendant has a claim that exceeds the jurisdiction of the small claims court and the claim relates to the contract, transaction, matter, or event which is the subject of the plaintiff’s claim. The sample also includes an order for transfer of small claims case.
James Walters Kellogg & Andelson - declaration 8.4.93jamesmaredmond
This document is a declaration by James F. Walters, a certified public accountant, in opposition to an application for a writ of attachment in a court case between City National Bank and Stephen Blanchard. Walters declares that he has served as the accountant for Blanchard and his construction company. He attended a meeting between Blanchard and the chairman of CNB to discuss the bank reneging on commitments to provide financing for one of Blanchard's real estate development projects. Walters asserts that most of the funds referenced in CNB's complaint were used by Blanchard for personal expenses rather than business purposes.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Howard K. Stern's motion to stay the mandate in the case of Elaine Marshall v. Howard K. Stern pending a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. The case involved the bankruptcy and estate of Vickie Lynn Marshall (aka Anna Nicole Smith).
Opposition to a California summary judgment motionLegalDocsPro
This sample opposition to a motion for summary judgment in California was created by a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
Sample California motion to strike complaintLegalDocsPro
This sample motion to strike portions of a complaint for California was created by a freelance paralegal who has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has used this sample for many years.
Caso de EliGio Cedeño contra Juan Felipe Lara FernándezInforme 25
This document is a summary order from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case of Eligio Cedeño v. Castillo. The order affirms the district court's dismissal of Cedeño's RICO complaint against various defendants for failure to state a claim. Specifically, it finds that Cedeño's complaint alleges an extraterritorial violation of RICO that the statute does not reach based on insufficient domestic conduct. It also rejects Cedeño's arguments that his claims fit within RICO's domestic focus and that RICO incorporates extraterritorial predicate offenses. The court further finds that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Cedeño's request to amend his complaint.
This order grants summary judgment to defendant Hawaii Family Forum and defendant Fuddy, denies summary judgment for plaintiffs, and denies defendant Abercrombie's motion for summary judgment as moot. The order also denies Hawaii Family Forum's motion to dismiss defendant Abercrombie. The court finds that plaintiffs' claims that Hawaii's laws restricting marriage to opposite-sex couples violate due process and equal protection are foreclosed by the Supreme Court's dismissal in Baker v. Nelson. Alternatively, the court finds plaintiffs' claims fail on the merits, and that Perry v. Brown does not control this case due to differences in California and Hawaii's same-sex marriage histories. The court concludes Hawaii's laws are rationally related to legitimate government interests.
This document is a motion for a stay of the mandate pending a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court. It was filed by Howard K. Stern on behalf of Vickie Lynn Marshall's estate following the 9th Circuit's denial of rehearing. The motion argues that substantial questions will be presented in the cert petition regarding the scope of bankruptcy courts' power over compulsory counterclaims. It contends the 9th Circuit's new test conflicts with other circuits and Supreme Court precedent. The declaration also asserts the petition raises important issues of bankruptcy practice that require uniformity.
Sample motion for protective order for deposition in CaliforniaLegalDocsPro
This sample motion for a protective order for a deposition in California is filed under the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure 2025.420(b) on the grounds that the moving party will suffer unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense if the court does not grant the motion for a protective order. The sample on which this preview is based is 18 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail. The author is an entrepreneur and freelance paralegal that has worked in California and Federal litigation since 1995 and has created over 300 sample legal documents for sale.
Sample California motion to compel attendance at deposition LegalDocsPro
This sample California motion to compel attendance at deposition and produce documents is used when a party has failed to attend a duly scheduled deposition. The motion to compel also requests sanctions and is filed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450 on the grounds that the deponent failed to appear and produce documents and failed to serve any valid objection in a timely manner. The sample on which this preview is based is 13 pages and includes brief instructions, a memorandum of points and authorities with citations to case law and statutory authority, sample declaration and proof of service by mail.
Sample California motion for protective order regarding interrogatories LegalDocsPro
This document is a notice of motion for a protective order regarding a set of interrogatories in a legal case. It gives notice that a party will move for a protective order on the grounds that the interrogatories exceed the limit of 35 without required declaration and some interrogatories are unduly burdensome. It also moves for monetary sanctions for failure to meet and confer in good faith to resolve the issues. The motion is made under relevant code sections and requests the protective order and sanctions be granted based on the notice, attached memorandum and declaration, and evidence presented at hearing.
Francisco Velez and Beatriz Wassmer planned to marry on September 4, 1954. However, on the day of the wedding, Velez left Beatriz a note postponing the wedding because his mother opposed it, and then disappeared without contact. Beatriz sued Velez for damages. The court found in favor of Beatriz, ordering Velez to pay damages. Velez appealed. Ordinarily, merely breaching a marriage promise is not grounds for a lawsuit. However, in this case Velez formally planned an elaborate wedding, invited guests, and left Beatriz humiliated just before the ceremony. The court found Velez's actions unjustifiable and awarded Beatriz moral and exempl
The document summarizes the results of an investigation by the Montana Attorney General into Central Asia Institute (CAI) and its co-founder Greg Mortenson. It finds that CAI's board failed in its oversight duties and Mortenson failed in his duties as executive director. A settlement was reached requiring governance changes at CAI, Mortenson's resignation, and over $1 million in restitution from Mortenson. The settlement aims to restore public trust in CAI while allowing it to continue its important educational work in Central Asia.
The document summarizes the results of an investigation by the Montana Attorney General into Central Asia Institute (CAI) and its co-founder Greg Mortenson. It finds that CAI's board failed in its oversight duties and Mortenson failed in his duties as executive director. A settlement was reached requiring governance changes at CAI, Mortenson's resignation, and over $1 million in restitution from Mortenson. The settlement aims to restore public trust in CAI while allowing it to continue its important educational work in Central Asia.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms for those who already suffer from conditions like anxiety and depression.
Cai expenses 10 nov 2010 30 sep 2011 annotatedByliner1
This document is an expense report for the Central Asia Institute from November 2010 through September 2011. It lists various expenses totaling over $150,000 USD, including $50,000 for hiring bonuses, $14,000 in salaries for a school, $10,752 for office and residential furniture, $3,984 for international travel, and $42,000 for COD disposal. The largest categories of expenses were for salaries, furniture, travel, and vehicle fuel costs.
This document is a letter from Plaintiffs' counsel opposing a motion to dismiss from Defendant Unigestion Holding. The letter argues that the complaint provides sufficient details about Unigestion's involvement in an alleged conspiracy to illegally impose fees on phone calls and money transfers to Haiti in violation of antitrust laws. The letter cites evidence from a New York Times article and videos showing an agreement was made between Unigestion and other defendants to fix prices. The letter also argues the complaint meets pleading standards and that dismissal would be improper at this stage.
The U.S. Court of Appeals considered whether the district court properly dismissed an antitrust lawsuit brought by U.S. residents against Haitian government officials and multinational corporations. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants conspired to fix prices for international phone calls and money transfers to Haiti by issuing an official Presidential Order and Circulars. The district court dismissed the suit based on the act of state doctrine and forum non conveniens. The Court of Appeals held that the act of state doctrine does not bar the antitrust claim because it does not require invalidating the Haitian government acts. The Court also found the district court did not give proper deference to the U.S. plaintiffs' choice of forum
This document is Penguin Group (USA) Inc.'s preliminary pretrial statement in a lawsuit filed against it and other defendants related to inaccuracies in two books published by Penguin. The statement addresses the required topics including a brief factual outline of the case, issues concerning jurisdiction and venue, the factual basis of claims and defenses, the legal theories underlying claims and defenses, computation of damages, related litigation, proposed stipulations, proposed deadlines, and controlling issues of law.
Hieleras ruled deprivation of constitutional rightsBryan Johnson
This order grants a preliminary injunction requiring the US Border Patrol to comply with its own guidelines for holding detainees, based on evidence that detainees' basic human needs were not being met. The court found the plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claims that conditions violated detainees' due process rights by depriving them of adequate sleep, hygiene, medical care, food and water, and warmth. While acknowledging funding constraints, the court ruled constitutional rights cannot be denied for fiscal reasons and ordered compliance with guidelines to provide these basic needs as outlined in the Border Patrol's 2008 policy and TEDS standards.
This document is an order from a United States District Court regarding motions to dismiss filed by defendants Darren Chaker and Nicole Chaker in a civil RICO lawsuit brought by plaintiffs Scott McMillan and The McMillan Law Firm. The order summarizes the allegations in the plaintiffs' amended complaint, which claims the defendants engaged in a pattern of extortion, harassment, and other unlawful acts as part of a RICO enterprise. The order analyzes the defendants' motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), considering whether the plaintiffs have adequately alleged predicate acts of racketeering, cognizable damages, and other elements of RICO and state law claims.
RK Associates, Raanan Katz Were Alleged In Unlawful Ejectment In Miamirkcenters
Defendants do not dispute, that security guards threw Plaintiffs off the property and that RK Associates and MWI changed the locks on the bank branch's office doors. Furthermore, Plaintiffs allege conversion of their remaining personal property by RK Associates and MWI after they were escorted from the premises. Judging from the record, the Court finds that there is a possibility that Plaintiffs can establish a cause of action against the resident defendant. Triggs, 154 F.3d at 1287. At the very least, Plaintiffs have a possibility of stating a viable cause of action against the landlord RK Associates for conversion of their equipment and for unlawful ejectment. Defendants themselves note that joinder is deemed legitimate when such possibility exists.
This document is an objection filed by the United States Trustee to motions filed by Petitioning Creditors and Alleged Debtors to seal certain documents filed with the court. The U.S. Trustee does not oppose sealing documents pending a ruling on whether the bankruptcy cases will proceed, but argues that any sealing should end if the court finds cause to open bankruptcy cases, as the information would then become public. The U.S. Trustee asserts that bankruptcy law favors public disclosure of information relevant to creditors and parties in interest.
Opinion granting plaintiffs' msj 17-02-10 reliance is required spending on ...Seth Row
US District Court, District of Oregon, order holding that insurer did not "rely" on insured's alleged misrepresentation by incurring expenses to investigate insured's loss
This document is a response by the plaintiffs to the defendants' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' first amended complaint. The plaintiffs argue that their complaint sufficiently states claims under RICO and for negligence and negligent misrepresentation. Specifically, the plaintiffs argue that each plaintiff has standing to bring the RICO claims because they sufficiently alleged injuries to their business or property that were proximately caused by the defendants' pattern of racketeering activity. The plaintiffs also argue they sufficiently alleged the existence of a RICO enterprise and pattern of racketeering activity through predicate acts of wire fraud and inducing interstate travel for fraudulent purposes. Therefore, the plaintiffs argue the defendants' motion to dismiss should be denied.
SDFL - Order Dismissing Various Claims - Jurisdiction - Trade SecretsPollard PLLC
The Plaintiff filed a 20 count lawsuit alleging, among other counts, theft of trade secrets, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, trademark infringement, violations of the Computer Fraud Abuse Act and more.
This is the classic shock and awe, everything and the kitchen sink approach to litigation.
In this instance, that approach backfired spectacularly. The Court dismissed 17 of the counts on jurisdictional grounds -- holding they cannot be refiled in federal court but must be pursued, if at all, in state court.
The court also dismissed one count with prejudice. Denied the motion to dismiss with respect to one count. And granted leave to amend on one count--- but warned plaintiff and its counsel to mind Rule 11 if they decide to amend.
Think twice before you file a 20 count complaint in federal court where you are literally throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks.
This document is a complaint filed by Central Asia Institute against Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company regarding insurance coverage. It summarizes that CAl had an insurance policy with Philadelphia to cover certain legal claims. CAl and its executive director Greg Mortenson were sued in two matters (the "Pfau Litigation" and "AG Matter") and incurred legal defense costs. However, Philadelphia refused to fully cover and advance these defense costs, in breach of the insurance contract. CAl is suing Philadelphia for declaratory relief and damages for its failure to honor coverage obligations.
This document is a court order adopting a magistrate judge's recommendation to remand a case back to state court. The court order provides additional analysis and comments supporting remand. Specifically, it finds that the plaintiffs' settlement demand of $155,000 did not establish by a preponderance of evidence that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, as settlement demands often reflect puffing and posturing. An affidavit from the plaintiffs' attorney further supported that the demand was made without adequate information and to facilitate settlement discussions. Therefore, the defendants did not meet their burden to keep the case in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction.
Express working capital llc v Starving Students IncM P
Synopsis
Background: Buyer of corporation's future credit card receivables brought action against seller-corporation and its owner, alleging breach of contract, promissory estoppel, fraud, and fraudulent inducement. Defendants asserted usury defense and counterclaim. Parties cross-moved for summary judgment.
This letter requests a pre-motion conference regarding an anticipated motion to dismiss an amended complaint filed against Digicel Haiti. It summarizes that the amended complaint should be dismissed for failing to meet pleading standards under FRCP 8(a), 9(b), and 12(b)(6), and based on the act-of-state doctrine and forum non conveniens. Specifically, the letter argues that the amended complaint does not provide a short, plain statement of claims, engages in impermissible group pleading, lacks specific allegations of fraud, and requires invalidating acts of the Haitian government.
This order denies the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction on their facial constitutional challenges to Article 19 of the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu. The order finds that: (1) Article 19 is a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction that is content-neutral and narrowly tailored to serve the significant government interest of maintaining public areas; (2) Plaintiffs are not likely to succeed on their claim that Article 19 is overly broad in violation of the First Amendment; and (3) Plaintiffs have failed to establish all the required elements for a preliminary injunction, including likelihood of success on the merits of their claims. Therefore, the court denies the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction based on their facial challenges to Article 19.
The document summarizes a court case involving defendants Robert Martins and Antonio Guastella who were convicted of money laundering, wire fraud, and conspiracy. The defendants appealed their convictions, arguing that the admission of their co-conspirators' guilty plea allocutions violated their rights under the Confrontation Clause. The court found that (1) admitting the plea allocutions did violate the defendants' rights given they could not cross-examine the co-conspirators, but (2) the error was harmless because the evidence against the defendants, such as documentary evidence establishing they set up fake banks together, was overwhelming. The convictions were therefore upheld.
The Alleged Debtors filed a motion requesting the court's permission to file an unredacted version of their Motion to Transfer Venue under seal. They argue the unredacted version contains sensitive commercial information regarding their financial condition and restructuring negotiations that could harm their business if disclosed publicly. The Alleged Debtors state they have publicly filed a redacted version, and the unredacted version would only be available to the court and specific receiving parties subject to confidentiality restrictions. They believe this balancing of interests appropriately protects their sensitive information while still allowing for consideration of the merits of their transfer motion.
Without wasting too much ink (and time) discussing how the October 2015 Visa Bulletin was transformed by the Department of State (DOS) when it was originally released on September 9th, 2015, and how the Priority Dates (PD) were revised only four (4) days before its effective date, this article seeks to analyze the very important question of whether the Plaintiffs in the Class Action Lawsuit can obtain Injunctive Relief from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Seattle.
This document is the Form 990 for Central Asia Institute for 2010. It summarizes the organization's mission as empowering communities in Central Asia through education, especially for girls, and promoting peace through education. It provides details on the organization's largest program services which include school building and support, teacher and student support, and global outreach programs to promote education in Central Asia.
This document contains the financial statements and supplemental information for Central Asia Institute for the years ended September 30, 2011 and 2010. It includes an independent auditor's report, statements of financial position, statements of activities, statements of cash flows, notes to the financial statements, and a supplemental schedule of benefits received from books. The statements show that in 2011 the organization had $25.7 million in total assets, $15.4 million in total revenues and support, and $25.3 million in total net assets.
This document is a motion filed by the plaintiffs' attorneys requesting permission from the court to file a fourth amended complaint. Specifically, the motion requests: (1) changing the class definition; (2) removing Michele Reinhart as a plaintiff and adding George and Susie Pfau; and (3) adding claims against additional defendants including Central Asia Institute and MC Consulting for alleged RICO violations. The motion also details why the plaintiffs' counsel believes the additional claims and parties are necessary.
This document is a class action lawsuit filed against Greg Mortenson, David Oliver Relin, Central Asia Institute, Penguin Group, and MC Consulting alleging violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity through fraudulent misrepresentations in Mortenson's books Three Cups of Tea and Stones Into Schools. Specifically, the complaint lists several examples of factual claims in the books that are alleged to be false and outlines how the defendants purportedly worked together as an enterprise to defraud purchasers of the books and donors to Central Asia Institute through these misrepresentations. The plaintiffs seek to represent a class of individuals who purchased the books
Central Asia Institute's (CAI) first school was built in Korphe, Pakistan in 1993. The village had no prior experience with formal education. Since then, a generation of children in Korphe have become literate. Some graduates have pursued higher education and good jobs, helping their community. When heavy rains destroyed the original school in 2010, CAI quickly rebuilt it, showing their long-term commitment to the community. The new school stands as a symbol of the progress and hope that education has provided to Korphe.
Central Asia Institute reported total revenues of $13.99 million for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2009. Expenses for the year were $9.72 million, resulting in an increase in net assets of $4.28 million. The majority of revenues came from contributions while most expenses went to program services for outreach and education. Assets increased to $15.17 million and net assets grew to $14.80 million.
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive functioning. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Cai audited financial report unexpurgated 2010 2009Byliner1
The document discusses the benefits of exercise for mental health. Regular physical activity can help reduce anxiety and depression and improve mood and cognitive function. Exercise causes chemical changes in the brain that may help protect against mental illness and improve symptoms.
Central Asia Institute (CAI) is a nonprofit that empowers communities in Central Asia through literacy and education programs, especially for girls. CAI uses a community-based model where villages initiate and manage projects, matching CAI funds. The organization is led by a board and has staff in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Tajikistan overseeing numerous school construction and education programs. CAI's mission is to promote peace through education and convey the importance of these activities globally.
Greg Mortenson, founder of the Central Asia Institute, released a statement defending his organization's work educating girls in Afghanistan and Pakistan in the face of criticism. He affirmed that over 60,000 students have been educated through locally built and operated schools, and that local partners remain committed to continuing this work despite attacks aimed at undermining their mission of creating better futures for children through education.
Central Asia Institute (CAI) continues to operate schools in remote areas of Pakistan and Afghanistan that provide education to tens of thousands, especially girls. CAI has established over 170 schools by empowering local communities and ensuring sustainability. CAI staff are conducting an internal review of operations in response to recent media allegations about Greg Mortenson and CAI. Donations to CAI are properly used to further its educational mission in the region in accordance with its rules.
Plaintiff's third amended complaint doc 38Byliner1
This document is a third amended class action complaint filed in federal court against Greg Mortenson, David Oliver Relin, Penguin Group, and MC Consulting. It alleges fraud, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment related to the books Three Cups of Tea and Stones Into Schools. Specifically, it claims the books and Mortenson's public statements contained numerous fabrications and omissions about Mortenson's humanitarian activities, and that the defendants misrepresented the books as true accounts in order to profit from increased book sales. The complaint seeks damages for purchasers of the books who relied on the representations that the stories were factual.
Ghulam Parvi held a meeting with community leaders in Skardu, Pakistan to discuss concerns about Greg Mortenson's book "Three Cups of Tea." The leaders expressed anger that the book contained false and insulting stories about their communities. They unanimously resolved to de-link their schools from Mortenson's Central Asia Institute and require a public apology from Mortenson within 10 days or else end all projects and association with him. Parvi will continue operating the schools independently as a local NGO.
The Central Asia Institute board meeting discussed:
1) Approving previous meeting minutes with corrections to board term lengths.
2) The status of the budget, with around $100,000 estimated to remain by year's end from $200,000 budgeted.
3) Establishing a chief operations position and reviewing business liability insurance.
4) Various CAI projects and expenditures, and nominating a new board member. Fundraising seminar action items were also adopted to improve infrastructure and develop a fundraising plan.
Here is Gabe Whitley's response to my defamation lawsuit for him calling me a rapist and perjurer in court documents.
You have to read it to believe it, but after you read it, you won't believe it. And I included eight examples of defamatory statements/
04062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
El Puerto de Algeciras continúa un año más como el más eficiente del continente europeo y vuelve a situarse en el “top ten” mundial, según el informe The Container Port Performance Index 2023 (CPPI), elaborado por el Banco Mundial y la consultora S&P Global.
El informe CPPI utiliza dos enfoques metodológicos diferentes para calcular la clasificación del índice: uno administrativo o técnico y otro estadístico, basado en análisis factorial (FA). Según los autores, esta dualidad pretende asegurar una clasificación que refleje con precisión el rendimiento real del puerto, a la vez que sea estadísticamente sólida. En esta edición del informe CPPI 2023, se han empleado los mismos enfoques metodológicos y se ha aplicado un método de agregación de clasificaciones para combinar los resultados de ambos enfoques y obtener una clasificación agregada.
An astonishing, first-of-its-kind, report by the NYT assessing damage in Ukraine. Even if the war ends tomorrow, in many places there will be nothing to go back to.
Essential Tools for Modern PR Business .pptxPragencyuk
Discover the essential tools and strategies for modern PR business success. Learn how to craft compelling news releases, leverage press release sites and news wires, stay updated with PR news, and integrate effective PR practices to enhance your brand's visibility and credibility. Elevate your PR efforts with our comprehensive guide.
Acolyte Episodes review (TV series) The Acolyte. Learn about the influence of the program on the Star Wars world, as well as new characters and story twists.
1. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 1 of 24
FILED
2012 RPR 30 AM 9 20
bY _
IN THE UNITED STATES DlSTRICEt<PP{{I~TE'~K
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
MISSOULA DIVISION
GEORGE and SUSIE PFAU, DAN
DONOVAN, and DEBORAH
NETTER, individually and on behalf No. CV-U-72-M-SEH
of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
VS.
GREG MORTENSON, DAVID
OLIVER RELIN, CENTRAL ASIA
INSTITUTE (CAl), a foreign
corporation, PENGUIN GROUP
(USA), INC., a Delaware Corporation,
and MC CONSULTING, INC., a
Montana Corporation,
Defendants.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs in this case allege themselves to be consumers who purchased
either Three Cups of Tea, a book coauthored by Defendants Greg Mortenson
-1
2. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 2 of 24
("Mortenson") and David Oliver Relin ("Relin"), or Stones Into Schools, a book
authored by Mortenson (collectively, "the Books"). Penguin Group, Inc.
("Penguin") published the Books. Plaintiffs claim they were harmed by
Defendants when they purchased the Books under the belief they were
"nonfiction," although the books were, allegedly, filled with fabrications.
Pending before the Court are Defendants' motions to dismiss Plaintiffs'
Fourth Amended Complaintl for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be
granted, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).2 All are opposed.
BACKGROllND3
In 1993, Mortenson visited mountains near K-2 in Pakistan.
Some years later, he and Relin coauthored Three Cups a/Tea as an account of
Mortenson's humanitarian efforts in Pakistan. Penguin published the book in
2006. A follow-up book, Stones Into Schools, written by Mortenson, was
published by Penguin in 2009. Penguin marketed both books as "nonfiction."
Central Asia Institute ("CAl"), a nonprofit Delaware corporation, headquartered in
Montana, allegedly expended significant sums of money to finance the writing,
1 Docket Nos. 134, 136, 138, and 147.
2 All further references to "Rule" or "Rules" are to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures,
unless otherwise noted.
3This background summary is drawn from allegations in the Fourth Amended Complaint
("Complaint").
-2
3. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 3 of 24
publishing and sales of the Books. Plaintiffs claim that Mortenson transferred
funds from the book sales to MC Consulting, Inc. ("MC"), a Montana corporation
asserted to be owned and controlled by Mortenson.
Plaintiffs contend they purchased one or more ofthe Books for
approximately $15 each. They claim that the Books should not be categorized as
nonfiction, as a number of misstatements relating to their contents have surfaced,
and that Mortenson, Relin, MC, CAl, and Penguin entered into a fraudulent
scheme to falsely portray Mortenson as a hero in order to boost book sales.
PLEADING AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On May 5, 2011, a class action complaint alleging fraud, deceit, breach of
contract, RICO violations, and unjust enrichment was brought against Mortenson
and CAI. 4 An amended complaint was filed six days later, which added Penguin
as a Defendant and Dan Donovan as a Plaintiff. Negligent misrepresentation
claims were also added. The alleged RICO violations were removed. s Plaintiffs
amended the complaint again on June 17, 20 II, removing Jean Price as a Plaintiff,
removing CAl as a Defendant, and adding Relin as a Defendant. Plaintiffs' Third
4The original complaint was filed in this court. Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and
1332(d) is not disputed.
'Docket No.3.
-3
4. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 4 of 24
Amended Complaint,6 filed July 27, 2011, asserted breach of contract, breach of
implied contract, fraud, deceit, unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentations by
Penguin and Relin, liability by Penguin as principal, punitive damages, unjust
enrichment by MC Consulting, for an accounting, for injunctive relief, and class
action allegations. In early August 20 II, Mortenson, MC, Penguin, and Relin
filed motions to dismiss. Plaintiffs responded on August 31, 20 II. On January
12,2012, the Court allowed Plaintiffs to file the current pleading, a Fourth
Amended Complaint.1 This pleading, inter alia, reinstated the claimed RICO
violations and again named CAl as a Defendant. Motions to dismiss were
renewed.
No class certification motion under Rule 23( c)(1 )(A) has been filed. In the
absence of such motion and in the interests ofjudicial economy, the Court has
detennined it appropriate to address and resolve the pending motions to dismiss. s
Hearing on the motions was held on April 18, 2012. The matter is ripe for
, Docket No. 38.
7 Docket No. 119.
s See Wade v. Kirkland, 118 F.3d 667, 670 (9th Cir. 1997) ("We recognize that, in some
cases, it may be appropriate in the interest of judicial economy to resolve a motion for summary
judgment or motion to dismiss prior to ruling on class certification"); Wright v. Schock, 742 F.2d
541,543-44 (9th Cir. 1984) (court properly ruled on motion for summary judgment before
certification because resolution protected parties from needless and costly further litigation and
parties did not suffer prejudice by early determination on merits).
-4
5. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 5 of 24
decision.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs now assert what are denominated as twelve separate causes of
action: RICO violations (Counts I and II), Breach ofConlract (Count III), Breach
of Implied Contract (Count IV), Fraud (Count V), Deceit (Count VI), Unjust
Enrichment (Count VII), Penguin Liable as Principal (VIII), Punitive Damages
(Count lX),9 Unjust Enrichment by MC (Count X), Accounting and Injunctive
Relief (Count XI), and Class Acti~n (Count XII). Defendants argue, inter alia,
that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the First Amendment, and that the Complaint
fails to (1) plead fraudulent activity with particularity, (2) meet plausibility
standards, (3) plead necessary elements, and (4) allege cognizable injuries.
Standard of Review
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) requires "a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief" in order to give a defendant a faif
notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it is based. "All
allegations of material fact are taken as true and construed in the light most
favorable to the nonmoving party" in assessing a motion to dismiss for failure to
state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). Cahill v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 80 F.3d 336,
'l As :;tated infra n. 32, punitive damages, if available, arc a measure of recovery, not a
separale claim or cause of action.
-5
6. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 6 of 24
337-38 (9th Cir. ] 996).
A two-step analytical process for determining the sufficiency of pleadings
under Rule 8 was established by the United States Supreme Court in Ashcroft v.
Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544
(2007). In step one, the court determines which allegations are merely "labels and
conclusions," "formulaic recitations," or "naked assertion[s]." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
678 (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557). The reviewing court need not accept
the truth of such allegations. Id. Step two requires the court to determine whether
the remaining allegations, which the court must accept as true, "plausibly give rise
to an entitlement to relief." Iqbal, 550 U.S. at 679. The reviewing court, in
determining plausibility, is required to engage in a context-specific task drawing
on the court's "judicial experience and common sense." Iqbal, 550 U.S. at 679.
Satisfaction of this pleading requirement does not oblige the pleader to show
probability of entitlement to relief, just plausibility.
Rule 9(b) requires a party alleging fraud to "state with particularity the
circumstances constituting fraud or mistake, [while] [m]alice, intent, knowledge,
and other conditions of a person's mind may be alleged generally." Iqbal
acknowledged that Rule 9(b) allows "a person's mind to be alleged generally," but
does "not require courts to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without
·6
7. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 7 of 24
reference to its factual context." Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 686. "Rule 9 ... excuses a
party from pleading discriminatory intent under an elevated pleading standard,"
but does not enable evasion of "the less rigid ... strictures of Rule 8." Iqbal, 556
U.S. at 686-87.
Plaintiffs' Claims
A. Counts I and II - RICO Claims
"The elements of a civil RICO claim are ... : (1) conduct (2) of an
enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity (known as 'predicate
acts') (5) causing injury to plaintiffs 'business or property'." Living Designs, Inc.
v. E.!. Dupont de Nemours, 431 F.3d 353, 361 (9th Cir. 2005)(citing Grimmett v.
Brown, 75 F.3d 506, 510 (9th Cir. 1996)(citing 18 U.S.C. § 1964(c), 1962(c». To
plead causation, Plaintiffs must allege that Defendants' violation was both the
direct and the proximate cause of a concrete financial injury. See Resolution Trust
Corp. v. Keating, 186 F.3d 1110,1117 (9th Cif. 1999).
All RICO claims involving fraud must be alleged with particularity under
Rule 9(b), and require plaintiffs to allege "the time, place, manner of each
predicate act, the nature of the scheme involved, and the role of each defendant in
the scheme." Lancaster Cmty. Hosp. v. Antelope Valley Hosp. Dist., 940 F.2d
397,405 (9th Cir. 1991). Furthermore, "Rule 9(b) does not allow a complaint to
-7
8. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 8 of 24
merely lump multiple defendants together." Swartz v. KPMG LLP, 476 F.3d 756,
764 (9th Cir. 2007). Plaintiffs are "require[d] to differentiate ... allegations when
suing more than one defendant ... and [mustj inform each defendant separately of
the allegations surrounding [that defendant's] alleged participation in the fraud."
Swartz, 476 F.3d at 764-65 (citing Haskin v. IU. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 995 F.
Supp. 1437, 1439 (M.D. Fla. 1998)(citation, quotation omitted).
Plaintiffs' RICO claims 10 attempt to establish, in a general fashion, the time,
place, manner of each predicate act, the nature of the scheme involved, and the
role of each defendant in the scheme. The primary racketeering activity alleged is
the Defendants' "ongoing scheme to deiraud and actually defrauding purchasers of
the books over at least an eight year period and continuing to this day, where they
continued to misrepresent that the contents of [the Books] were true, nonfiction
accounts of what really happened, when, in fact, the contents were false and the
accounts did not happen."!! Essentially, Plaintiffs contend that Defendants knew
the truth, but portrayed Mortenson into a hero in ordcr to persuade people to buy
the Books, which financially benefitted the Defendants.
10 Fourth Am. Compl. at '1[11 15-16 (Jan. I, 2012)("Compl."). Plaintiffs allege that the
enterprise devised and intended to devise a scheme or artifice to defraud and to obtain money by
means of false and fraudulent pretenses and representations and for the purpose of executing
such schemes and artifice.
11 CompI. at 11 12.
-8
9. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 9 of 24
Plaintiffs begin their factual accusations by listing several alleged
fabrications within the Books, which the enterprise wrote. Plaintiffs next describe
numerous lies said to have taken place after the Books were written. Examples
include CAl purchasing many of the Books from outlets, the enterprise using
"fraudulent speaking engagements," paying Mortenson's expenses, and
advertising and promoting the Books. 12 Many of these purported lies do not
actually appear to be untruthful or illegal, and are overly vague.13
The Complaint rests on two primary arguments: (1) the enterprise advertised
and promoted the books;14 and (2) the enterprise caused Mortenson to make
several public statements regarding good works he performed which were purely
fabricated. IS Plaintiffs also allege, "[o]n information and belief, [that] Mortenson .
. . transferred funds from his book sales to MC and otherwise involved MC in the
marketing and sale ofthe books."16
12 Compl. at 'If 13 (N-Z).
13 The Complaint does allege that CAl falsified annual audits, and engaged in possible
fraudulent corporate dealings with Mortenson. However, Plaintiffs lack standing to prosecute
such acts. See Sedima, S.P.R.L. v.lmrex Co., Inc., 473 U.s. 479, 496 (1985); Canyon County v.
Syngenta Seeds. Inc., 519 F.3d 969, 972 (9th Cir. 2008).
14The Complaint references several advertisements referring to the Books as true stories
or having appeared on a best-seiling nonfiction list.
The Complaint references a 2007 book tour, an April 16, 2011, press release, an April
IS
15,2010, website entry, and a webinar post in April 2010. Compl. at -' J3 (T -Z ).
16 Compl. at 'If 8.
-9
10. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 10 of 24
The Complaint states, in support of causation, that the individual Plaintiffs
purchased the Books because it was "represented to [them] as true."17 The RICO
claims assert: "There is no question but that Plaintiffs did rely on such fraud and
misrepresentations of the enterprise so as to show causation for their individual
damages, but there is no requirement to show that every victim to the enterprise's
mail fraud and wire fraud relied upon the fraud in order to recover."18
Plaintiffs assert they suffered concrete financial loss when they paid full
price for a nonfiction book when it was fiction. The financial loss is alleged to be
"the out-of-pocket loss, ... minus the value of the false and fraudulent
"nonfiction" books, which is [characterized as] zero."19
The RICO claims are fraught with shortcomings, including failure to satisfy
causal elements, failure to specify the roles of the Defendants, not adequately
pleading enterprise theories, and failure to specify an actionable, identifiable
racketeering activity. Failure to adequately address the causal elements is the
ultimate and fatal flaw. The Complaint does not state, nor is it possible to
17 Id. at ~ 1,2,3, and 33.
18 Id. at~ 17.
19 Paragraph 19 of the Complaint states that "[t]he out-of-pocket measure of damages is
the difference in the actual value between what the Plaintiffs paid and what they received and
will restore the Plaintiffs to the financial position they enjoyed prior to the fraudulent
transaction."
.0.
11. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 11 of 24
ascertain, whether Plaintiffs would have purchased the Books if: (I) the Books
were labeled or marketed as fiction; or (2) the readers knew portions of the Books,
as claimed, were fabricated. Plaintiffs' overly broad statements that they paid
approximately $15 for the Books because they were represented as true does not
suffice. Additionally, Plaintiffs fail to allege when they purchased the Books,
which is crucial in analyzing this case. 20 In fact, Plaintiffs never allege they
visited CArs website or saw or heard any statements made by it before purchasing
the Books.
The Complaint likewise does not differentiate allegations against each
Defendant, nor does it inform Defendants separately of the allegations surrounding
any alleged participation in the fraud. General statements that the enterprise
caused Mortenson to make various false statements relating to his life experiences
do not satisfy Twombly and Iqbal standards. 21 Pleaded examples of how the
enterprise marketed and promoted the Books also fail to satisfy appropriate
pleading standards. Members of the enterprise cannot be expected to defend
against Plaintiffs' claims, when each participant's role is only vaguely described,
if at all. Furthermore, it is not clear what role Relin played in this matter, aside
20 For example, the Complaint makes no distinction between purchases made before or
after Plaintiffs became aware that the Books were allegedly fabricated.
21 Compl. at ~r 13 (T-Y).
-11
12. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 12 of 24
from coauthoring Three Cups afTea, as all references to him are lumped together
with Mortenson and Penguin, and any alleged wrongdoings attributed to him are
clearly "labels and conclusions" or "naked assertions."
The Complaint's conclusory allegations referencing the legal clements of a
RICO enterprise fail. The "enterprise" element is not met. See U.S. v. Turkette,
452 U.S. 576, 583 (1981). Moreover, no RICO claim through an "associate-in
fact enterprise" theory, is pleaded. 22 Evidence supporting such a theory is missing
from the Complaint.
As noted, the primary wrongdoing claimed is that Detendants allegedly
knew of the Books' falsehoods and decided to write, promote, and sell them under
the guise of nonfiction. Those conciusory statements as to the Defendants' alleged
intentional wrongdoings are included without reference to their factual context,
much like the plaintiff in IqbaL2l With the exception of Mortenson, upon whose
life experiences the Books are based, this Court cannot give credit to such
unsupported accusations. The Complaint does not satisfy RICO elements. The
22 An associate-in-fact enterprise is comprised of "a group of persons associated together
for a common purpose of engaging in a course of conduct." Turkette, 452 U.S. 581-83. Both
"evidence of an ongoing organization, formal or infonnal, and ... evidence that the various
associates function as a continuing unit" must be alleged. Id.
2, In Iqbal, the plaintiffs complaint alleged, inter alia, that the defendants (FBI officials,
among other governmental entities) "knew of, condoned, and willfully and maliciously agreed"
to subject him to harsh conditions of confinement. IQbal, 556 U.S. at 669.
-12
13. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 13 of 24
RICO claims are not plausible and fail.
B. Counts V and VI - Fraud and Deceit
A common law fraud pleading must allege nine elements: "(1) a
representation; (2) its falsity; (3) its materiality; (4) the speaker's knowledge of its
falsity or ignorance of its truth; (5) the speaker's intent that it should be acted
upon by the person and in the manner reasonably contemplated; (6) the hearer's
ignorance of its falsity; (7) the hearer's reliance upon its truth; (8) the right of the
hearer to rely upon it; and (9) the hearer's consequent and proximate injury or
damage" caused by their reliance on the representation. May v. ERA Landmark
Real Estate of Bozeman, 15 P.3d 1179, 1182 (Mont. 2000). The heightened
pleading standard of Rule 9(b) must be met. See Bly-Magee v. California. 236
F.3d 1014, 1018 (9th Cir. 2001); Iiraunhofer v. Price, 594 P.2d 324, 328 (Mont.
1979).
Under Montana law, deceit may be proven if "[0]ne ... willfully deceives
another with [the] intent to induce that person to alter the person's position to [his]
injury or risk." Mont. Code Ann. § 27-1-712. Deceit can be either: (a) suggesting
a falsity as a fact "by one who does not believe it to be true;" (b) asserting "as a
fact (something] which is not true by one who has no reasonable ground for
believing it to be true;" (c) suppressing "a fact by one who is bound to disclose it
-13
14. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 14 of 24
or who gives information of other facts that are likely to mislead for want of
communication ofthat fact; or (d) a promise made without any intention of
performing it. Id. Additionally, "[0)ne who practices ... deceit with intent to
defraud the public or a particular class of persons is considered to have intended to
defraud every individual in that class who is actually misled by the deceit. Id.
Deceit is essentially grounded in fraud, therefore, Rule 9(b)'s heightened pleading
standard applies. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA, 317 F.3d 1097, 1103-05 (9th
Cir.2003).
The fraud and deceit claims incorporate allegations from the RICO claims.
Formulaic recitations of elements of fraud and deceit are added.
Plaintiffs assert that the fraud and deceit claims meet Rule 9(b)'s specificity
requirements. Not so. The fraud pleadings in point of fact are weakened by
incorporation of the flawed RICO allegations. Moreover, the Complaint fails to
specify what representation the Plaintiffs relied upon 24 or the materiality of that
representation. Plaintiffs are not entitled to rely on general allegations of
purported lies within the Books' content. At a minimum, Plaintiffs must show that
they relied on some particular statement by the Defendants made outside the text
of the Books. A formulaic statement of the elements of fraud in this instance is
24 For example, a book tour, website, or a nonfiction print on a cover.
-14
15. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 15 of 24
insufficient. Here, important, and indeed, necessary, facts supporting the elements
are mlssmg. The fraud claim (Count V) as pleaded is not plausible and must be
dismissed. The same conclusion applies to the deceit claim (Count VI), which
likewise lacks factual support allowing it to continue.
C. Counts III and IV - Breaches of Contract and Implied Contract
A contract must contain: H( I) identifiable parties capable of contracting; (2)
their consent; (3) a lawful object; and (4) a sufficient cause or consideration."
Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-102; Interstate Prod. Credit Ass'n. v. Abbott, 726 P.2d
824,826 (Mont. 1986). The parties' "consent ... must be free, mutual, and
communicated by each to the other." Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-301; Abbott, 726
P .2d at 826; See also Keesum Partners v. Ferdig Oil Co. Inc., 816 P .2d 417, 421
(Mont. 1991). lfthe contract's terms "are stated in words," an express contract is
found. Mont. Code Ann. § 28-2-103. If the "existence and terms" of an
agreement "are manifested by conduct," rather than words, an implied contract
may exist. ld. An implied "contract arises not from consent of the parties but
from the law of natural justice and equity, and is based on the doctrine of unjust
enrichment." Brown v. Thornton, 432 P.2d 386, 390 (Mont. 1967).
Assertion of a claim for breach of contract requires privity of contract
between plaintiff and defendant. State ex reL Buttrey Foods, Inc. v. Dist. Court of
-15
16. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 16 of 24
Third Judicial Dist., 420 P.2d 845, 847 (Mont. 1966). The Court has not found
and the parties have not referenced controlling authority or persuasive case law in
the Ninth Circuit directed to privity of contract between an author or publisher of a
book and a reader who purchased such book. The Second Circuit's principle that
a news publisher is not in privity with the publication's purchasers, absent "fraud
amounting to deceit, libel, or slander" is, however, persuasive. First Equity Corp.
of Fla. v. Standard & Poor's Corp., 869 F.2d 175, 179 (2d CiL 1989); See also
Jaillet v. Cashman, 115 Misc. 383,384 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1921).25
The Ninth Circuit has cited First Equity in holding that a book publisher
owed no duty to a car dealership owner for allegedly publishing errors concerning
emission systems in automobiles. Sinai v. Mitchell Books, 996 F.2d 1227 (9 th Cir.
1993). Incidentally, Lacoff v. Buena Vista Pub .. Inc., 183 Misc. 2d 600, 611
(N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2000) cited Sinai in supporting that publishers have no duty to
investigate the accuracy of its books. Lacoff dismissed a consumer action against
a publisher and arranger of a "how to" book for alleged false claims within the
books. While contract claims were not discussed in detail in those cases, they
nevertheless serve as a starting point for analyzing privity as it relates to contract
25 JaiIlet held that "no contract or fiduciary relationship" existed between a publisher and
"one of a public to whom all news is liable to be disseminated." Jailet, 115 Misc. at 384.
-16
17. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 17 of 24
formation and contract law. 26
Plaintiffs' contract claim asserts that: (1) "Mortenson, Relin, and Penguin
offered ... the Plaintiffs and the class" (2) "nonfiction and true stories of
Mortenson's activities," (3) "Plaintiffs ... paid for, and received, the ... books,"
(4) but many "representations made in the books were false, misleading, deceptive,
and contrary to the agreement.,,27 Plaintiffs and the class are said to have suffered
damages as a result.
The Complaint contains no allegations that the parties entered an express
contract with terms expressed in "words." An express contract is not well-
pleaded. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 686-87; Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555-56.
Plaintiffs' alternative breach of implied contract claim states that, "[b]y
writing, publishing, advertising, marketing, and promoting [the Books] as
nonfiction and true stories, the charaeteristics of said books became an implied
contractual condition of sale upon the purchase thereof by the Plaintiffs and the
class."28 Defendants respond to the contract claims with the argument that the
Complaint does not allege Plaintiffs communicated with any Defendant, and
26 This Court is not, however, analyzing an author or publisher's First Amendment
protection, if any, but rather their relationship to readers as it applies to contract formation.
'7
' Comp!. at'l[ 35.
" Comp!. at '139.
-17
18. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 18 of 24
therefore, consent is not found, and there is no privity of contract, which Montana
requires in contract claims. See Buttrey Foods, Inc., 420 P.2d at 847 (complaint
alleging breach of a lease agreement alone, without establishing the requisite
privity of contract between the parties, fails to state a claim).29
The Court cannot accept as true, and as a matter of sufficiency of pleading,
Plaintiffs' conclusory statement that H[b]y writing, publishing, advertising,
marketing, and promoting (the Books] as nonfiction and true stories, the
characteristics of said books became an implied contractual condition of sale."
More is necessary if an implied contract is to be found.
The Complaint, arguably, may be said to adequately plead two of the four
elements necessary in a breach of implied contract claim. The implied contract
claim could be said to plead a lawful object (a book sale), and identifiable parties
capable of contracting (Plaintiffs as purchasers, and Relin, Mortenson, and
Penguin as authors and publisher). However, consent and consideration are not
shown.
Plaintiffs claim to have paid $15 consideration to receive the Books.
Whether Penguin, Mortenson, Relin or someone else received Plaintiffs' money is
not asserted. Penguin, as publisher, arguably may have received a portion of the
29 The Court is aware that privity is not required in Consumer Protections Act or certain
tort claims, however, no such claims are made in the present case.
-18
19. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 19 of 24
money, but the Complaint does not indicate whether Relin or Mortenson received
any part of the consideration. Although further investigation might reveal a
contract between Penguin and the authors entitling Relin and Mortenson to some
share of the profits, the Complaint does not so allege.
Even if consideration were not at issue, consent has not been shown.
Plaintiffs fail to establish whether Mortenson, or Relin, or Penguin offered the
Books for sale, instead naming all three as having offered the Books for sale to
purchasers as nonfiction pieces ofliterature.
The Montana Supreme Court has determined that ifan implied contract is to
said to exist, the four elements of a contract must still be present and some form of
communication and relationship must exist between the parties. See CB & F
Development Corp. v. Culbertson State Bank, 844 P.2d 85 (Mont. 1992); Lythgoe
v. First Sec. Bank of Helena, 720 P .2d 1184 (Mont. 1986); In re Marriage of Rock,
850 P.2d 296 (Mont. 1993); McNulty v. Bewley Corp., 596 P.2d 474 (Mont.
]979); St. James Cmty. Hosp. v. Dept. of Social and Rehabilitation Services, 595
P .2d 379 (Mont. 1979). Such is not the case here.
The conclusion reached in Jaillet and First Equity that no privity exists
between a publisher or author, and a purchasing reader is sound. Plaintiffs here
failed to cite any law supporting that a contract existed between the parties and,
19
20. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 20 of 24
while the conduct of the parties may be considered in assessing whether an
implied contract existed, the abstract facts pleaded here do not rise to that level.
Neither the contract claim nor the implied contract claim survives. Both must be
dismissed. 30
D. Remaining Claims
"[U]njust enrichment is an equitable means of preventing one party from
benefitting from his ... wrongful acts." Hinebauch v. McRae, 264 P.3d 1098,
1103-04 (Mont. 2011)(citing Estate ofPruvn v. Axmen Propane, Inc., 223 P.3d
845 (Mont. 2009)( citations omitted). Even "in the absence of a contract between
parties, [unjust enrichment] may create an implied contract in law." Id. To prevail
on a claim for unjust enrichment, a "plaintiff must show some element of
misconduct or fault on the part of the defendant, or that the defendant somehow
took advantage of the plaintiff." Randolph V. Peterson, Inc. v. J.R. Simplot Co.,
778 P.2d 879, 883 (Mont. 1989)(citing Brown v. Thornton, 432 P.2d 386, 390
(Mont. 1967». As previously discussed, Plaintiffs have failed to sufficiently
allege reliance, cognizable injury, and misconduct against the Defendants. The
30 No resolution of Defendants' lack of damages argument is required. Several questions,
nevertheless, remain as to whether Plaintiffs could prove compensable injuries or damages.
However, the court has found no controlling authority to support the conclusion that a purchaser
of a so-called nonfiction memoir based on an actual person, which includes fabrications, suffers a
cognizable injury. See In Ie BridgestonelFirestone, Inc. Tires Products Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp.
2d 1069 (S.D. Ind. 2001); Small v. Lorillard Tobacco Co., 94 N.Y. 2d 43 (N.Y. 1999).
-20
21. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 21 of 24
Unjust Enrichment claims (Counts VII and X) are dismissed.
An inj unction "is appropriate [only] when a party demonstrates' (1) that it
has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law ... are
inadequate ... ; (3) that, considering the balance of hardships between the
[parties], a remedy in equity is warranted; and (4) that the public interest would
not be disservcd by a permanent injunction. '" Northern Cheyenne Tribe v.
Norton, 503 F.3d 836, 843 (9th Cir. 2007)(citing eBay Inc. V. MercExchal1Z'h
L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388, 391 (2006). Plaintiffs fail to allege an "irreparable injury"
or that remedies at law are inadequate, as evidenced by Plaintiffs' specifIc damage
request '(the price of the books )31 Plaintiffs also fail to demonstrate that, in
considering the hardship between the parties, a remedy in equity is warranted. The
Injunction claim (Count XI) fails and is dismissed.
An accounting must show that there is some relationship between the parties
requiring an accounting, and that the plaintiff is entitled to a balance that can only
be ascertained by such relief. Teselle v. McLoughlin, 173 CaL App. 4th 156, 179
80 (2009). Plaintiffs fail to show, or even allege, such a relationship exists.
Furthermore, they specifically allege the right to recovcr a certain sum or a sum
that can be made certain by calculation. For these rcasons, the Accounting claim
" Compl. at ~rll 19, 22, 24, 33, 36, and 44.
-21
22. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 22 of 24
(Count XI) fails and is dismissed.
Plaintiffs' failure to adequately allege valid causes of action as claimed in
Counts I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, X, and XI is fatal to the remaining claims in Count
VIII (Penguin Liable as Principlc), Count XII (Class Action), and Count IX
(Punitive Damages).J2
CONCLUSION
In short, the Complaint fails and is deficient on several fronts. The RICO,
fraud, and deceit claims are not pled with the requisite level of particularity.
Plaintiffs fail to satisfy causal elements of RICO, do not identify each Defendant's
role in the frauds, present highly questionable enterprise theories, do not
adequately identify the alleged racketeering activity, and fail to identify the
specific representations and materiality of such representations relied upon. An
express contract is not pleaded. An implied contract is not found, as consent and
consideration are missing. In the absence 0 r adequate allegations of reliance,
cognizable injury, and misconduct against the Defendants, the remaining claims
faiL
The question remains as to whether Plaintiffs should be allowed leave to
12"[Plunitive damages are merely a component of recovery of the underlying" civil
claims. Finstad v, W,K Grace & Co., 8 P.3d 778. 782 (Mont. 2000); see also Mont. Code Ann.
§ 27-1-220(1).
-22
23. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 23 of 24
amend. Five factors are to be, and have been, considered: "(1) bad faith; (2) undue
delay; (3) prejudice to the opposing party; (4) futility of amendment; and (5)
whether the plaintiff has previously amended his complaint." Junes v. Ashcroft,
375 F.3d 805, 808 (9th Cir. 2004)( citing Bonin v. Calderon, 59 F.3d 815, 845 (9th
CiL 1995). "Futility alone can justify the denial of a motion for leave to amend."
The case has been pending for almost a year. Thc Complaint before the
Court is the fifth pleading filed. PlaintitIs have been accorded every opportunity
to adequately plead a case, if one exists. Moreover, the imprecise, in part flimsy,
and speculative nature of the claims and theories advanced underscore the
necessary conclusion that further amendment would be futile. This case will be
dismissed with prejudiceY
ORDER
1. Defendants' Motions to Dismiss 34 arc GRANTED.
2. The Complaint" is DISMISSED WITH PIU~JUDICE.
"Given the Court's detennination on the pleading issues, consideration of First
Amendment issues is unnecessary.
3·j Docket Nos. 134, 136, 138, and 147.
" Docket No. 119.
-23~
24. Case 9:11-cv-00072-SEH Document 180 Filed 04/30/12 Page 24 of 24
All other pen~lmotions are DENIED as moot.
36
3.
DATED this -dfl ay of April 2012.
~ilrf~...u
United States District Judge
J6 Docket Nos. 120, 123, 126, and 166.
-24