Garrison v. Oracle Corp.

2 Citing cases

  1. Garrison v. Oracle Corp.

    159 F. Supp. 3d 1044 (N.D. Cal. 2016)   Cited 23 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding the continuous accrual doctrine inapplicable where the plaintiff did not allege any right to periodic payments

    Restricted Hiring Agreement between Oracle and Google was the sole Secret Agreement alleged in Garrison's original complaint. See Garrison v. Oracle Corp., No. 14–CV–04592–LHK 2015 WL 1849517, at *2 (N.D.Cal. Apr. 22, 2015). Now, the SAC specifically identifies the following Secret Agreements:

  2. McKinnon v. Dollar Thrifty Auto. Grp., Inc.

    Case No. 12-cv-04457-YGR (N.D. Cal. Nov. 7, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    In the Ninth Circuit, leave to amend "should be granted 'unless amendment would cause prejudice to the opposing party, is sought in bad faith, is futile, or creates undue delay." Yakama Indian Nation v. State of Wash. Dep't of Revenue, 176 F.3d 1241, 1246 (9th Cir. 1999); see also Garrison v. Oracle Corp., No. 14-CV-04592-LHK, 2015 WL 1849517, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 22, 2015). Courts have found amendment to be appropriate where plaintiffs' claim the addition of a new named plaintiff is "essential to the success of th[e] action."