Clark v. Walt Disney Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the court could take judicial notice of dictionary definitions without converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment because “a dictionary is one of those sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned . . . .”
• holding that the court could take judicial notice of dictionary definitions without converting a motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment because “a dictionary is one of those sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned . . . .”
• finding failure to respond to a particular argument in a motion to dismiss amounted to implied concession such a claim was not viable
• “Because the Lanham Act and the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act are substantially similar, ‘an analysis appropriate for a determination of liability under section 43(a
• “The court may also consider documents . . . attache[d] to a motion to dismiss if the documents are referred to in the complaint and are central to Plaintiff’s claims.” (citation omitted)
• describing the laws as “substantially similar”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).