Upgrade to remove ads
Civil Procedure - 9/11 - Twombly and Iqbal
Terms in this set (7)
Bell Atlantic Corp. Vs. Twombly holding
1 - To survive a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, factual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level, on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true even if doubtful in fact.
2 - This calls for enough facts to raise a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of illegal agreement, not independent action.
3 - Although for the purposes of a motion to dismiss we must take all of the factual allegations in the complaint as true, we "are not bound to accept as true a legal conclusion couched as a factual allegation. only a complaint that states a plausible claim for relief survives a motion to dismiss.
4 - Nothing in the complaint invests either the action or inaction alleged with plausible suggestion of a conspiracy. The complaint merely pleaded that hte defendants might have violated Section1. that was not enough to nudge claims across the line from conceivable to plausible.
5 - Retired "no set of facts" for the plausibility test.
6 - While a complaint attacked by a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted does not need detailed factual allegations, a plaintiff's obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.
Reasoning for Twombly holding
1 - Proceeding to antitrust discovery is very expensive. With allegation requirements, we can potentially avoid enormous expense of discovery.
2 - Conley described the breadth of opportunity to prove what an adequate complain claims, not the minimum standard of adequate pleading to govern a complaint's survival ("no set of facts" was misused and had to go).
Ashcroft Vs. Iqbal holding
1 - A pleading that offers "labels and conclusions" or a "formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do".
2 - Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions "devoid of further factual enhancement".
3 - To survive motion to dismiss, complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face; claim has "facial plausibility" when plaintiff pleads factual content that allows court to draw reasonable inference that defendant is liable for misconduct alleged.
4 - The courts must allege as true all allegations contained in a complaint as applicable to legal conclusions. Legal conclusion in a complaint must be supported by factual allegations.
5 - Under Twombly construction of rule 8, the plaintiff hasn't nudged his claims of invidious discrimination across the line from conceivable to plausible.
6 - Plaintiff's assertions amount to nothing more than a formulaic recitation of the elements of constitutional discrimination (conclusory allegations are not entitled to be assumed true).
7 - "Plausibility" standard, for complaint to survive motion to dismiss for failure to satisfy short and plain statement requirement, is not akin to probability requirement, but asks for more than sheer possibility that defendant has acted unlawfully.
1 - Twombly doesn't arequire the courts at the motion-to-dismiss stage to consider whether the factual allegations are probably true.
2 - Rule 12b6 doesn't countenance dismissals based on a judge's disbelief of a complaint's factual allegations.
4 - Iqbal complaint contains enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Taking the complaint as a whole, it gives the defenant fair notice of what the claim is, and the grounds on which it stands on.
Plausibility test according to Iqbal
1 - strike all legal conclusions from the complaint (as they don't warrant presumption of truth),
2 - apply plausibility analysis to remianing allegations
Determining a plausible claim for relief after Twombly
determining whether a complaint states a plausible claim for relief...will be a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense.
1 - it rejected the "no set of facts" test as a way to judge the sufficiency of a complaint's notice;
2 - it imposed a seemingly more stringent "plausibility" test to judge the dufficiency of a complaint's substance (i.e its legal and factual merit)
THIS SET IS OFTEN IN FOLDERS WITH...
Civil Procedure - 9/9 - Conley & Swierkiewicz
Civil Procedure - 9/4 - Hawkins vs Masters Farm
Civil Procedure - 9/16 - Service, defenses and obj…
Civil Procedure - 9/18/2013 - Amending the Pleadin…
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE...
Chapter 11 Litigation
Motion for summary judgment
legal final 2
BADM 300 Ch 3
OTHER SETS BY THIS CREATOR
MPEP Most Tested Sections
MPEP 600, 700, 800, 1200, 1800, 2100 TOC
Leal Oral Argument
OTHER QUIZLET SETS
PSYCH 2310 Exam 2 Social Psychology
Comm Theory Final
HP 421 EXAM 3
Multimedia News Test No1