Wehlage v. EmpRes Healthcare, 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, even where plaintiff alleges sufficient facts to demonstrate a unity of interest, defendants cannot be held liable under an alter ego theory unless plaintiff “alleges facts to suggest that an inequitable result will occur if [moving defendants] are not held liable.”
• “[T]he equitable abstention doctrine does not afford the Court discretion to abstain from hearing Plaintiffs claims for damages under section 1430(b) or the CLRA, which are legal remedies.”
• “[T]he equitable abstention doctrine does not afford the Court discretion to abstain from hearing Plaintiff’s claims for damages under section 1430(b) or the CLRA, which are legal remedies.”
• “Plaintiff has not alleged that [defendants] . . . deceived her in the sale of services to her and that she suffered damages as a result. Accordingly, the Court grants the . . . motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s CLRA claims.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).