green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
74.4 score
“section 7433 creates a private right of action only for tax collection activity that violates some provision of the revenue code or the regulations promulgated thereunder.”
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Norman Diamond v. United States
section 7433 creates a private right of action only for tax collection activity that violates some provision of the revenue code or the regulations promulgated thereunder.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Park Townsend, LLC v. Clarendon America Insurance
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the court need not accept as true ... allegations that contradict facts that may be judicially noticed by the court.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Jet Aviation Flight Services Incorporated v. 7BD LLC
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ashwell Law v. University of Washington
Courts must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and view the fact in the light 22 most favorable to the pleading party, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 23 2000), but this rule does not apply to legal conclusions, see Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 .
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Hutton v. XPO Logistics Freight Incorporated
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 17 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Assance v. Lincoln County
Consistently, “[t]he court need not accept as true . . . allegations [in the complaint] that contradict facts that may be judicially noticed by the court .. . and may consider documents that are referred to in the complaint whose authenticity no party questions.” Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000) (internal citations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Hanna v. Internal Revenue Services (IRS)
That 4 provision provides in part “[i]f, in connection with any collection of Federal tax with 5 respect to a taxpayer, any officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service recklessly 6 or intentionally, or by reason of negligence, disregards any provision of this title, or any 7 regulation promulgated under this title, such taxpayer may bring a civil action for damages 8 against the United States in a district court of the United States.” 26 U.S.C. § 7433 (a). 9 “Section 7433 creates a private right of action only for tax collection activity that violates 10 some provision of the Re…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mattox v. Debt Collectors International
Courts must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and view the fact in the light 15 most favorable to the pleading party, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 16 2000), but this rule does not apply to legal conclusions.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Arizona Education Association v. Arizona Education Association Staff Organization
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Islas v. Bank of America
Courts must accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and view the fact in the light 6 most favorable to the pleading party, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 7 2000), but this rule does not apply to legal conclusions.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Dowdy, Tom v. Mann
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Circle K Procurement and Brands Limited v. Goli Nutrition Incorporated
Shwartz 234 F.3d at 428.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Deri-Alvarado v. Waste Management
Rule 8(a)(2) requires a “short and plain statement of the claim showing 20 that the pleader is entitled to relief,” so that the Defendants has “fair notice of what 21 the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 22 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). 23 In reviewing a complaint for failure to state a claim, the Court “must construe the 24 complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and must accept all well-pleaded 25 factual allegations as true,” Schwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 4…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Walker v. AIU Insurance Company
Rule 8(a)(2) requires a “short and plain statement of the claim showing that the 6 pleader is entitled to relief,” so that the defendant has “fair notice of what the . . . claim is 7 and the grounds upon which it rests.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 , 555 8 (2007) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 47 (1957)). 9 In reviewing a complaint for failure to state a claim, the Court “must construe the 10 complaint in the light most favorable to the plaintiff and must accept all well-pleaded 11 factual allegations as true,” Schwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Howard Holdings Incorporated v. Life Saver Pool Fence Systems Incorporated
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bennett v. The Federal Savings Bank
Given the statutory definition of subservicer includes “performing servicing on behalf of the master servicer,” 12 C.F.R. § 1024.31 , TFSB is a master servicer not only by its own admission in their motion (Dkt. 14-1, at 17, 71), but also as alleged by Bennett (Dkt. 1, at 98, 151) 1 While normally, the Court cannot refer to documents outside of the complaint, the Court “may consider documents that are referred to in the complaint whose authenticity no party questions.” Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Li v. Arcsoft, Inc.
Cal. 18 Sept. 26, 2013) (citing Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Conner v. United States
That letter also failed to comply with the requirement that the taxpayer 14 include the dollar amount of the claim;24 Conner stated only that she seeks “monetary damages 15 in the amount of $ Sum-Total-Amt withheld-to-date; and accruing daily.”25 Finally, Conner’s 16 other exhibits consisting of letters between herself, her employer Southwest Airlines, and the 17 18 19 19 See Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 433 (9th Cir. 2000); 26 U.S.C. § 7433 (a). 20 26 U.S.C. § 7433 (d)(1). 20 21 26 C.F.R. §301.7433-1 (e)(2); see Clark v. United States, 462 F. App’x 719, 721 (9th Cir. 21 2…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Arau v. Rocket Mortgage, LLC
Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 12 Moreover, when a plaintiff proceeds without representation by a lawyer, the Court must “construe 13 the pleadings liberally . . . to afford the petitioner the benefit of any doubt.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 14 F.3d 338 , 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (cleaned up). 15 But the Court need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticeable facts, 16 see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look beyond the 17 plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) motion int…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lengele v. Willamette Leadership Academy
The court "may [also] consider documents that are referred to in the complaint whose authenticity no party questions." Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000) (citation omitted).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Young v. Arizona, State of
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Timco v. Kircher
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Huynh v. Walmart, Inc.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 12 Moreover, when a plaintiff proceeds without representation by a lawyer, the Court must “construe 13 the pleadings liberally . . . to afford the petitioner the benefit of any doubt.” Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 14 F.3d 338 , 342 (9th Cir. 2010) (cleaned up). 15 But the Court need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticeable facts, 16 see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look beyond the 17 plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) motion int…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Heyrend v. Badger Medical, P.A.
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Nasca v. New York State Dept. of Taxation & Fin.
That statute creates a private right of action in the Court of Claims for a challenge totax collection activity that allegedly violates a provision of the tax code or the regulations promulgated thereunder ( compare Shwarz v United States , 234 F3d 428, 433 [9th Cir 2000]).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Miller v. Auto Credit Sales
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000). 7 Plaintiffs are residents of Washington.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Mountains of Spices LLC v. Lafrenz
Although Rule 8 does not require “detailed factual 17 allegations,” it requires “more than an unadorned, the defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me 18 accusation.” Id. 19 Although the Court construes the facts alleged in the complaint in the light most 20 favorable to the plaintiff and accepts all well-pleaded factual allegations as true, Shwarz 21 v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), the Court need not accept as true “a 22 legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation,” Papasan v. Allain, 478 U.S. 265 , 286 23 (1986). 24 III.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Madluvv LLC v. Brow Trio LLC
However, Counter-defendant did not make this argument (nor 28 authenticate the documents) and the Court will not make such argument on Counter- Defendant’s behalf. 1 factual inferences in the light most favorable to the drafter of the complaint/counterclaim. 2 See Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Tijerino v. USA Pawn Jewelry
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Lindow v. Conservatorship of Carl E. Lindow
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 21 2000).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Randall Merth v. Management & Training Corp.
See Van Strum v. Lawn, 940 F.2d 406 , 13 409 (9th Cir. 1991); Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Shwarz v. United 14 States, 234 F.3d 428, 432 (9th Cir. 2000)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Hand v. Management and Training Corporation
“To state a claim for relief under Bivens, a plaintiff must 28 allege that a federal officer deprived him of his constitutional rights.” Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 432 (9th Cir. 2000). 2 A Bivens claim is only available against officers in their individual capacities.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Neeley v. Arizona, State of
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Brown v. Google LLC
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 19 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 20 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 21 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 22 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 23 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 24 1995).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Elite Semiconductor, Inc. v. Anchor Semiconductor, Inc.
The 17 Court need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. 18 United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look beyond the plaintiff’s 19 complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) motion into a motion 20 for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 1995).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Mois v. Ciolli
See Van Strum, 940 F.2d at 409 ; Serra v. Lappin, 20 600 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 432 (9th Cir. 21 2000)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
(PC) Donaldson v. Garland
“To 2 state a claim for relief under Bivens, a plaintiff must allege that a federal officer deprived him of 3 his constitutional rights.” Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (citing see 4 Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 432 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Maslic v. ISM Vuzem d.o.o.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 4 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 5 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 6 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 7 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 8 1995).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Temming v. Summus Holdings, LLC
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000). 11 Fraud allegations elicit a more demanding standard.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Tobias v. NVIDIA Corporation
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Cole-Parmer Instrument Company LLC v. Professional Laboratories, Inc.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 8 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 9 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 10 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 11 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 12 motion into a motion for summary judgment.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Elite Semiconductor, Inc. v. Anchor Semiconductor, Inc.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025, 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 10 The Court need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticeable facts, 11 see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look beyond the 12 plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) motion into 13 a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 1995).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Arroyo v. IA Lodging Santa Clara, L.L.C.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 3 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 4 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 5 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 6 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 7 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 8 1995).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Newman v. Google LLC
Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
YZ Productions, Inc. v. Redbubble, Inc.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 21 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 22 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 23 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 24 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 25 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 26 1995).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Johnson v. Dizdar
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 12 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 13 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 14 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 15 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 16 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 17 1995).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Holtz v. Frostman
However, the court need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(c) motion into a motion for summary judgment.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ahmed v. County of Santa Clara
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 10 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 11 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 12 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 13 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 14 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 15 1995).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Choates v. County of Santa Clara
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 20 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 21 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 22 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 23 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 24 motion into a motion for summary judgment.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Xianhua v. Oath Holdings, Inc. f/k/a/Yahoo! Inc.
Co., 519 F.3d 1025 , 18 1031 (9th Cir. 2008). 19 The Court, however, need not accept as true allegations contradicted by judicially 20 noticeable facts, see Shwarz v. United States, 234 F.3d 428, 435 (9th Cir. 2000), and it “may look 21 beyond the plaintiff’s complaint to matters of public record” without converting the Rule 12(b)(6) 22 motion into a motion for summary judgment, Shaw v. Hahn, 56 F.3d 1128 , 1129 n.1 (9th Cir. 23 1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stephen SIMON, an Individual and as Assignee of Assignors, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
VALUE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, INC., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
v.
VALUE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, INC., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees
98-55905.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Dec 7, 2000.
Nelson, Rymer.
Cited by 8 opinions | Published
ORDER
The opinion filed March 17, 2000, appearing at 208 F.3d 1073, (9th Cir.2000), is amended as follows:
Page 1076, caption: change Defendants-Appellants to Defendants-Appellees, and add Specialty Medical Clinic, Inc. and Specialty Medical Clinic Inc. Employee Benefit Plan at the end of the list of defendants-appellees.