Chao v. Rivendell Woods, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “[b]y electing to stand on her complaint,” the plaintiff “has waived the right to later amend”
• explaining that, under Domino Sugar, this court must “examine the appealability of a dismissal without prejudice based on the specific facts of the case in order to guard against piecemeal litigation and repetitive appeals”
• explaining that, under Domino Sugar, this court must “examine the appealability of a dismissal without prejudice based on the specific facts of the case in order to guard against piecemeal litigation and repetitive appeals”
• interpreting Domino Sugar to “require[ an appellate panel] to examine the appealability of a dismissal without prejudice based on the specific facts of the case in order to guard against piecemeal litigation and repetitive appeals”
• “A pleading that can survive a Rule 12(e) . motion necessarily can withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).”
• “In Domino Sugar, we noted the difference between an order dismissing .an action without prejudice and one dismissing a complaint without prejudice, stating that the latter order is generally not appeal-able.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).