Naporano Iron & Metal Co. v. American Crane Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a crane is merchandise under the NJFCA because it is “generally available to the public” and “in use at construction sites across the globe”
• noting that “[p]leadings containing collectivized allegations against ‘defendants’ do not suffice. ... A plaintiff must plead fraud with particularity with respect to each defendant, thereby informing each defendant of the nature of its alleged participation in the fraud.”
• noting that negligent misrepresentation claims are not subject to Rule 9(b)
• dismissing Plaintiffs product liability claim and holding there is no “sudden and calamitous” exception to the economic loss doctrine in New Jersey law
• “Importantly, [New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act] claims ‘sounding in fraud’ are subject to the particularity requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).”
• “Importantly, [New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act] claims ‘sounding in fraud’ are subject to the particularity requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).