Fieldstone, may exist such that Countrywide could be indirectly liable for Hilltop and Fieldstone’s violation of the CTA and fraudulent misrepresentations. Although the plaintiffs do not allege an agency relationship between Countrywide and the other defendants in their complaint, it is not necessary for a pleading to allege an agency relationship in order to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. “[A]s a matter of law, allegations of agency, vicarious liability, and/or respondeat superior are not required. A person legally responsible for an act may be alleged to have committed it without going into the theories which support that ultimate fact.” Greenberg v. Sala, 822 F.2d 882, 886 (9th.Cir.1987); see also Fed. Sav. and Loan Ins. Corp. v. Shearson-Am., 658 F.Supp. 1331, 1343 (D.P.R.1987) (<HOLDING>). IV. Ameriquest’s motion to dismiss
holding that a party can be held liable for securities fraud on an agency or a respondeat superior theory holding inter alia that a municipality cannot be held liable under section 1983 on a respondeat superior theory holding that a municipality cannot be liable on a respondeat superior theory holding that liability may not be predicated upon a theory of respondeat superior because a supervisor can be liable only for his own acts or omissions holding that municipality may not be held liable under  1983 upon theory of respondeat superior