§Why CasetextPricing

Alliance Of Automotive Service Providers, Inc. et al v. Erie Insurance Exchange et al

MOTION to dismiss for failure to state a claim

7 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 270,937 times   367 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

  2. American Dental Assoc. v. Cigna Corp.

    605 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,592 times
    Holding that the district court properly dismissed plaintiffs' § 1962(c) claims because plaintiffs had not sufficiently pled the acts of mail and wire fraud alleged to form a pattern of racketeering activity

  3. Elevator Antitrust v. United Tech

    502 F.3d 47 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 812 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conspiratorial activity “in entirely general terms without any specification of any particular activities by any particular defendant ... was nothing more than a list of theoretical possibilities, which one could postulate without knowing any facts whatever”

  4. City of Tuscaloosa v. Harcros Chemicals, Inc.

    158 F.3d 548 (11th Cir. 1998)   Cited 750 times
    Holding that courts should avoid "the confusion and conflation of admissibility issues with issues regarding the sufficiency of [a party's] evidence"

  5. Animal Sci. Prods., Inc. v. China Nat'l Metals & Minerals Imp. & Exp. Corp.

    596 F. Supp. 2d 842 (D.N.J. 2008)   Cited 205 times
    Concluding that plaintiff's complaint failed to establish subject matter jurisdiction and thus "granting [p]laintiff's motion for default judgment would be wholly inappropriate"

  6. Cellco P'ship v. Hope

    No. CV11-0432 PHX DGC (D. Ariz. Mar. 6, 2012)

    No. CV11-0432 PHX DGC 03-06-2012 Cellco Partnership doing business as Verizon Wireless, Plaintiff, v. Jason Hope, et al., Defendants. David G. Campbell ORDER Defendants (collectively "JAWA") filed a motion for reconsideration of a limited portion of the Court's January 30, 2012 order in which the Court dismissed eight of JAWA's counterclaims. Doc. 284; see Doc. 273. Pursuant to the Court's order (Doc. 286), Plaintiff filed a response (Doc. 290). JAWA asks the Court to reinstate its Sherman Act claim

  7. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 158,801 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."