Costle v. Republic Steel Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a plaintiff who did not defend a claim 2 in response to motions to dismiss may not revive the claim on appeal
• explaining that “a 16 complaint need not distinguish between defendants that had the exact same role in a fraud” to 17 comply with Rule 9(b)
• explaining that, to satisfy Rule 9(b), plaintiffs must “differentiate their allegations” and cannot “lump” together dissimilar defendants
• holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in 8 dismissing with prejudice a claim that the plaintiff “did not defend” in response to a motion 9 to dismiss
• noting that, under Rule 9(b), “a 27 pleading must identify ‘the who, what, when, where, and how of the misconduct charged,’ as well 1 as ‘what is false or misleading about [the purportedly fraudulent statement], and why it is false’”
• noting, in the context of Rule 9(b)’s pleading 25 requirements for a qui tam action brought under the federal False Claims Act, that “a complaint 26 need not distinguish between defendants that had the exact same role in a fraud”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).