22 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 251,689 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Canton v. Harris
489 U.S. 378 (1989) Cited 16,275 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the city could be held liable for failing to train police officers in determining whether detainees needed medical care because of the likelihood that, absent proper training, the officers would default on their constitutional obligations
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.
510 U.S. 517 (1994) Cited 2,814 times 30 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988
Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Corp.
429 U.S. 252 (1977) Cited 4,278 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs need show only that "a discriminatory purpose has been a motivating factor in the decision," because, after all, "[r]arely can it be said that a legislature or administrative body operating under a broad mandate made a decision motivated solely by a single concern, or even that a particular purpose was the ‘dominant’ or ‘primary’ one."
U.S. v. Ritchie
342 F.3d 903 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 3,643 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"
McHenry v. Renne
84 F.3d 1172 (9th Cir. 1996) Cited 4,212 times
Holding that a pleading that is "argumentative, prolix, replete with redundancy," and does not state "who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery" must be dismissed
Jones v. Blanas
393 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 2,812 times
Holding for the first time that an SVP detainee "is entitled to conditions of confinement that are not punitive"
Fantasy, Inc. v. Fogerty
984 F.2d 1524 (9th Cir. 1993) Cited 1,354 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court properly struck lengthy, stale and previously litigated factual allegations to streamline the action
Awabdy v. City of Adelanto
368 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 610 times
Holding that the "presumption of prosecutorial independence does not bar a subsequent § 1983 claim against state or local officials who improperly exerted pressure on the prosecutor, knowingly provided misinformation to him, concealed exculpatory evidence, or otherwise engaged in wrongful or bad faith conduct that was actively instrumental in causing the initiation of legal proceedings"
Jablon v. Dean Witter Co.
614 F.2d 677 (9th Cir. 1980) Cited 827 times
Holding complaint may be dismissed on statute of limitations grounds where allegations therein, even when read with required liberality, would not permit plaintiff to prove statute was tolled
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 344,767 times 920 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 945.6 - Statute of limitations on suit for which claim required
Cal. Gov. Code § 945.6 Cited 662 times 1 Legal Analyses
Setting forth time limitations for commencing action against public entity
Section 945.3 - Action prohibited while criminal charges pending before superior court; statute of limitations tolled while charges pending
Cal. Gov. Code § 945.3 Cited 179 times
Tolling the statute of limitations during the period that charges are pending before a superior court

Cross et al v. City and County of San Francisco et al

22 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that the city could be held liable for failing to train police officers in determining whether detainees needed medical care because of the likelihood that, absent proper training, the officers would default on their constitutional obligations

Holding that under the Copyright Act fee-shifting statute, 17 U.S.C. § 505, defendants and plaintiffs are to be treated the same, contrary to the Court's interpretation of § 1988

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 that a pleading that is "argumentative, prolix, replete with redundancy," and does not state "who is being sued, for what relief, and on what theory, with enough detail to guide discovery" must be dismissed

Holding for the first time that an SVP detainee "is entitled to conditions of confinement that are not punitive"

Holding that the district court properly struck lengthy, stale and previously litigated factual allegations to streamline the action

Holding complaint may be dismissed on statute of limitations grounds where allegations therein, even when read with required liberality, would not permit plaintiff to prove statute was tolled

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

Setting forth time limitations for commencing action against public entity

Tolling the statute of limitations during the period that charges are pending before a superior court