Free Animal / Dog Law case summaries from Justia.
If you are unable to see this message, click here to view it in a web browser. | | Animal / Dog Law August 28, 2020 |
|
|
Table of Contents | Cisneros v. Petland, Inc. Animal / Dog Law, Class Action, White Collar Crime US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit |
Click here to remove Verdict from subsequent Justia newsletter(s). | New on Verdict Legal Analysis and Commentary | Drafted and Shafted: Who Should Complain About Male-Only Registration? | SHERRY F. COLB | | Cornell law professor comments on a recent opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit holding that requiring men but not women to register for the draft is constitutional under mandatory U.S. Supreme Court precedents. Specifically, Colb considers what the U.S. Supreme Court should do if it agrees to hear the case and more narrowly, whether the motives of the plaintiffs in that case bear on how the case should come out. | Read More |
|
Animal / Dog Law Opinions | Cisneros v. Petland, Inc. | Court: US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Docket: 18-12064 Opinion Date: August 25, 2020 Judge: Marcus Areas of Law: Animal / Dog Law, Class Action, White Collar Crime | After plaintiff bought a puppy from Petland and the puppy died a week later, plaintiff filed suit under the civil provisions contained in the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), alleging that the puppy's death was the result of a nationwide racketeering conspiracy. Plaintiff alleged that defendants are involved in a conspiracy to sell sick puppies for premium prices and engaged in a campaign of obfuscation after the sale to aid Petland in avoiding its warranties. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of plaintiff's RICO complaint for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The court held that the complaint failed to plead facts that plausibly support the inference that defendants shared a common purpose to commit the massive fraud she alleges. Furthermore, plaintiff has failed to allege with particularity that each defendant engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity. The court also held that plaintiff adequately alleged in her complaint that the Class Action Fairness Act vested the district court with original jurisdiction over her Georgia RICO claim. Therefore, the court vacated the portion of the district court's order declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and remanded with instructions to dismiss plaintiff's state-law RICO claim with prejudice. | |
|
About Justia Opinion Summaries | Justia Weekly Opinion Summaries is a free service, with 63 different newsletters, each covering a different practice area. | Justia also provides 68 daily jurisdictional newsletters, covering every federal appellate court and the highest courts of all US states. | All daily and weekly Justia newsletters are free. Subscribe or modify your newsletter subscription preferences at daily.justia.com. | You may freely redistribute this email in whole. | About Justia | Justia is an online platform that provides the community with open access to the law, legal information, and lawyers. |
|
|