Jose Rolo v. City Investing Company Liquidating Trust

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court did not commit abuse of discretion by denying plaintiffs leave to amend when they had ample opportunity to plead their claims fully
• holding that prior to class certification, the adequacy of the pleading in a RICO action must be based on the specificity of the fraud allegation relating to the named plaintiffs
• holding that, until a class is certified, a RICO action is one between the named plaintiffs and defendants, and the adequacy of the pleading must be analyzed with regard to the specificity of the fraud allegations relating to the named plaintiffs
• holding that, until a class is certified, a RICO action is one between the named plaintiffs and defendants, and the adequacy of the pleading must be analyzed with regard to the specificity of the fraud allegations relating to the named plaintiffs
• finding Rule 60(b) relief permissible as a substitute for appeal where \exceptional circumstances\ exist
• finding Rule 60(b) relief permissible as a substitute for appeal where “exceptional circumstances” exist

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).