Skip to main content
· 3/19/1985

Herman Friedlander, Etc., Cross-Appellees v. Jerry C. Nims, Timex Corporation, Cross-Appellant

Citations

  • 755 F.2d 810
  • 1 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 946
  • 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 28398

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that a “district court should give a plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint rather than dismiss it when it appears that a more carefully drafted complaint might state a claim”
  • “[A] court considering a motion to dismiss for failure to plead fraud with particularity should always be careful to harmonize . . . [R]ule 9(b) with the broader policy of notice pleading.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Vance, Anderson, Pittman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.