Central Mortgage Co. v. Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Holdings LLC

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that courts must “accept even vague allegations in the Complaint as ‘well-pleaded’ if they provide the defendant notice of the claim”
• holding that the existence of a general statement that plaintiff met conditions precedent was sufficient to avoid dismissal
• perceiving that the Court of Chancery had moved to adopt recent federal decisional law such as Twombly and Iqbal
• holding that a breach of contract complaint provided fair notice to defendant because “the Complaint also alleges, and it bears notation, that on 47 separate occasions, [Defendant] in fact repurchased loans,” which properly identifies the alleged breach under the Agreement
• stating that as a general matter “the lower ‘reasonable conceivability’ threshold continues to apply [to motions to dismiss] in Delaware state courts”
• stating that, in the motion to dismiss context, the Court should “not [dismiss a claim] unless the plaintiff would not be entitled to recover under any reasonably conceivable set of circumstances”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).