46 Cited authorities

New Hampshire v. Maine
532 U.S. 742 (2001) Cited 4,543 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the doctrine of judicial estoppel, “New Hampshire is equitably barred from asserting—contrary to its position in the 1970's litigation—that the inland Piscataqua River boundary runs along the Maine shore”
Crawford-El v. Britton
523 U.S. 574 (1998) Cited 3,866 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiff may pursue ordinary discovery into official's intent for claims having intent element notwithstanding irrelevance of intent to qualified immunity defense
Lee v. City of L.A.
250 F.3d 668 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 10,578 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court erred in granting a motion to dismiss "by relying on extrinsic evidence and by taking judicial notice of disputed matters of fact to support its ruling"
Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.
504 U.S. 451 (1992) Cited 2,287 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that "it is clearly reasonable to infer that [the defendant] has market power to raise prices and drive out competition in the aftermarkets" for service and parts despite an undisputed lack of market power in the initial product
Astoria Federal S. L. Ass'n. v. Solimino
501 U.S. 104 (1991) Cited 1,252 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion
U.S. v. Ritchie
342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,670 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court may consider "certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment"
Beech Aircraft Corp. v. Rainey
488 U.S. 153 (1988) Cited 749 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding a Navy aircraft accident investigative report was admissible
Mine Workers v. Pennington
381 U.S. 657 (1965) Cited 1,624 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that immunity extends to petitioning conduct “either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme”
Eastern R. Conf. v. Noerr Motors
365 U.S. 127 (1961) Cited 1,886 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that antitrust laws do not apply to businesses combining to lobby the government, even where such conduct has an anticompetitive purpose and an anticompetitive effect, because the alternative "would raise important constitutional questions" under the First Amendment
Mack v. S. Bay Beer Distribs., Inc.
798 F.2d 1279 (9th Cir. 1986) Cited 2,370 times
Holding that state agency determination in unemployment hearing did not preclude federal employment discrimination claim because plaintiff did not have adequate opportunity to present discrimination claim before agency
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 345,885 times 922 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts
Fed. R. Evid. 201 Cited 28,281 times 26 Legal Analyses
Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."
Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay
Fed. R. Evid. 801 Cited 19,100 times 75 Legal Analyses
Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party
Rule 803 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-Regardless of Whether the Declarant Is Available as a Witness
Fed. R. Evid. 803 Cited 12,664 times 85 Legal Analyses
Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities
Rule 7 - Pleadings Allowed; Form of Motions and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 7 Cited 7,520 times 2 Legal Analyses
Defining "pleadings" for purposes of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

Hu Honua Bioenergy, LLC v. Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc.

46 Cited authorities

Holding that under the doctrine of judicial estoppel, “New Hampshire is equitably barred from asserting—contrary to its position in the 1970's litigation—that the inland Piscataqua River boundary runs along the Maine shore”

Holding that plaintiff may pursue ordinary discovery into official's intent for claims having intent element notwithstanding irrelevance of intent to qualified immunity defense

Holding that the district court erred in granting a motion to dismiss "by relying on extrinsic evidence and by taking judicial notice of disputed matters of fact to support its ruling"

Holding that "it is clearly reasonable to infer that [the defendant] has market power to raise prices and drive out competition in the aftermarkets" for service and parts despite an undisputed lack of market power in the initial product

Holding that where a plaintiff must exhaust state administrative proceedings to bring federal claims, the administrative adjudication lacks res judicata effect, as an exception to the default rule of administrative preclusion

Holding that a court may consider "certain materials—documents attached to the complaint, documents incorporated by reference in the complaint, or matters of judicial notice—without converting the motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment"

Holding a Navy aircraft accident investigative report was admissible

Holding that immunity extends to petitioning conduct “either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme”

Holding that antitrust laws do not apply to businesses combining to lobby the government, even where such conduct has an anticompetitive purpose and an anticompetitive effect, because the alternative "would raise important constitutional questions" under the First Amendment

Holding that state agency determination in unemployment hearing did not preclude federal employment discrimination claim because plaintiff did not have adequate opportunity to present discrimination claim before agency

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party

Recognizing exception to rule against hearsay for records of regularly conducted activities

Defining "pleadings" for purposes of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure