Murphy, Esq. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:21-cv-06812
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Murphy v. Comcast, Judge Chhabria granted Comcast’s motion to dismiss, allowing amendment because the complaint lacked valid claims and coherence.
The order affected Shannon O. Murphy, Esq., the other plaintiffs, and Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC. The plaintiffs’ complaint was dismissed with leave to amend, and the case could continue if an amended complaint was filed and addressed the court’s concerns.
What happened
In Murphy, Esq. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, Comcast removed the case to federal court and moved to dismiss the complaint. The opinion identifies Shannon O. Murphy, Esq., and other plaintiffs as the parties suing Comcast.
The court said California law does not recognize a claim called “injury/illness.” It also found that the form complaint did not provide the basic elements of negligence or breach of contract and that its allegations were vague and incoherent. The court further agreed that Murphy, described as a non-lawyer, could not pursue a class action without a lawyer.
Judge Vince Chhabria granted Comcast’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend. An amended complaint was due within 21 days of the order, and Comcast had 21 days to respond after it was filed.
The detailed version
- Murphy, Esq. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC · No. 3:21-cv-06812
- Vince Chhabria
- Oct. 18, 2021
Background
Comcast removed the case to federal court and filed a motion to dismiss. The caption identifies Shannon O. Murphy, Esq., and other plaintiffs as the plaintiffs and Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC, as the defendant.
Court’s Analysis
The court held that California state law does not provide a cause of action called “injury/illness.” It also found that the form complaint failed to allege the basic elements required for claims of negligence or breach of contract. The court described the allegations that were included as vague and incoherent.
The court also agreed with Comcast that Murphy, whom the opinion describes as a non-lawyer, could not prosecute a class action without a lawyer. The opinion cited Simon v. Hartford Life, Inc. for that point.
Disposition
The court granted Comcast’s motion to dismiss with leave to amend. An amended complaint was due 21 days from the date of the order, and Comcast was required to respond within 21 days after the amended complaint was filed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.