DeLuca v. AccessIT Group, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a company that was in the business of hardware and software sales and technical support was not a “principal” under § 191
• concluding that documents in plaintiff’s possession were not integral to the Complaint because the plaintiff did not “rel[y] on the documents in framing his complaint”
• holding that extrinsic documents may only be considered on a motion to dismiss if they “are (1) attached to the complaint; (2) incorporated into the complaint by reference; or (3) integral to the complaint”
• stating that “[t]o be incorporated by reference, the complaint must make a clear, definite and substantial reference to the documents”
• holding for a document to be incorporated by reference, “the complaint must make ‘a clear, definite and substantial reference to the documents’”
• holding for a document to be incorporated by reference, “the complaint must make ‘a clear, definite and substantial reference to the documents’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).