D. Connecticut· 9/29/2005
IM PARTNERS v. Debit Direct Ltd.
Citations
- 394 F. Supp. 2d 503
- 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22399
- 2005 WL 2406008
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- “There are many representations that can be made about the prospects of a proposed business that, even if the business turns out not to be successful, are not fraudulent.”
- “[T]he false statements [of] an element of negligent misrepresentation do not have to be stated with the same degree of particularity [as a claim of fraud] to survive a motion to dismiss.”
- “[T]he false statements [of] an element of negligent misrepresentation do not have to be stated with the same degree of particularity to survive a motion to dismiss” as of a claim of fraud.”
- “[T]he false statements . . . of negligent misrepresentation do not have to be stated with the same degree of particularity [as for a claim of fraud] to survive a motion to dismiss.”
- Rule 9(b) does not apply
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hall
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
7 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. AmericasS.D. New York· 2009-09-16· cited 40×
- Estate of Axelrod v. FlanneryD. Connecticut· 2007-03-12· cited 16×
- Brown-Thomas v. HynieD. South Carolina· 2019-02-06· cited 8×
- Lentini v. FIDELITY NAT. TITLE INS. CO. NEW YORKD. Connecticut· 2007-03-23· cited 7×
- DeNuzzo v. Yale New Haven HospitalD. Connecticut· 2006-12-19· cited 6×
- Lee v. Enterprise Leasing Co.-West, LLCD. Nevada· 2014-06-24· cited 4×
- Conn. Ironworkers Employers' Ass'n v. New Eng. Reg'l Council of CarpentersD. Connecticut· 2018-05-23· cited 2×
Cites
64 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court· 1957-11-18· cited 30,380×
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1945-12-03· cited 18,588×
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court· 1974-04-17· cited 13,385×
- Burger King Corp. v. RudzewiczSupreme Court· 1985-05-20· cited 12,253×
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court· 2002-02-26· cited 8,748×
- Hanson v. DencklaSupreme Court· 1958-10-13· cited 7,025×
- Ernst & Ernst v. HochfelderSupreme Court· 1976-05-19· cited 3,533×
- Davis v. SchererSupreme Court· 1984-08-16· cited 2,605×
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court· 2002-01-08· cited 1,264×
- Chiarella v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1980-03-18· cited 1,089×
- Mills v. Polar Molecular Corp.Second Circuit· 1993-12-17· cited 848×
- Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. SchlunkSupreme Court· 1988-06-15· cited 735×
- Marine Midland Bank, N.A. v. James W. MillerSecond Circuit· 1981-11-20· cited 733×
- Eternity Global Master Fund Limited v. Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and Jpmorgan Chase BankSecond Circuit· 2004-07-09· cited 724×
- Novak v. KasaksSecond Circuit· 2000-06-21· cited 686×
- Acito v. IMCERA Group, Inc.Second Circuit· 1995-02-01· cited 639×
- Rombach v. ChangSecond Circuit· 2004-01-20· cited 523×
- Bank Brussels Lambert v. Fiddler Gonzalez & RodriguezSecond Circuit· 1999-03-26· cited 482×
- Kalnit v. EichlerSecond Circuit· 2001-09-05· cited 348×
- Pino Distefano v. Carozzi North America, Inc.Second Circuit· 2001-10-18· cited 302×
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.