ARMSTRONG v. DEERE & COMPANY

ARMSTRONG v. DEERE & COMPANY

Plaintiff:	CRAIG ARMSTRONG
Defendant:	DEERE & COMPANY
Case Number:	1:2016cv00844
Filed:	April 15, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge:	Tanya Walton Pratt
Nature of Suit:	Contract: Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
September 20, 2017	Filing 33 ORDER - 24 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is granted in part and denied in part. Deere's motion to dismiss Count I, the IDCSA claim is granted. Deere's motion to dismiss Count Two is granted. Deere's motion to di smiss Count Seven is granted. The Court grants Deere's motion to dismiss Counts Eight and Nine, Armstrong's common law fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation claims. Deere's Motion to dismiss Count Twelve is granted. The Court gran ts Deere's Motion to dismiss Count Fourteen. The Court denies Deere's motion to dismiss Count Fifteen. For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant Deere & Company's Motion to Dismiss. (Fi ling No. 24.) The Court finds that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for breach of the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act; breach of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act; constructive fraud; common law fraud; fraudulent concealment; fraudulent misrepresentation; and negligent misrepresentation, and these claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court, however, concludes that Armstrong has properly pled a state law claim for Count Fifteen-unjust enrichment and this claim survives the initial hurdle of a motion to dismiss. See order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/20/2017. (MEJ)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 20, 2017

Filing 33 ORDER - 24 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim is granted in part and denied in part. Deere's motion to dismiss Count I, the IDCSA claim is granted. Deere's motion to dismiss Count Two is granted. Deere's motion to di smiss Count Seven is granted. The Court grants Deere's motion to dismiss Counts Eight and Nine, Armstrong's common law fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation claims. Deere's Motion to dismiss Count Twelve is granted. The Court gran ts Deere's Motion to dismiss Count Fourteen. The Court denies Deere's motion to dismiss Count Fifteen. For the reasons stated above, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendant Deere & Company's Motion to Dismiss. (Fi ling No. 24.) The Court finds that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim for breach of the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act; breach of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act; constructive fraud; common law fraud; fraudulent concealment; fraudulent misrepresentation; and negligent misrepresentation, and these claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Court, however, concludes that Armstrong has properly pled a state law claim for Count Fifteen-unjust enrichment and this claim survives the initial hurdle of a motion to dismiss. See order for details. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 9/20/2017. (MEJ)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: ARMSTRONG v. DEERE & COMPANY
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: CRAIG ARMSTRONG
Represented By:	Jason Ruskin Reese
Represented By:	Stephen M. Wagner
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: DEERE & COMPANY
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?