71 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,626 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
  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 266,542 times   365 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' "
  3. Colorado River Water Cons. Dist. v. U.S.

    424 U.S. 800 (1976)   Cited 8,186 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in limited circumstances, federal courts should abstain from deciding a case when there are related proceedings pending in state court
  4. New Orleans Pub. Serv., Inc. v. New Orleans

    491 U.S. 350 (1989)   Cited 2,005 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Burford abstention is not appropriate where the plaintiff's claim "does not involve a state-law claim," and rejecting the Fifth Circuit's declaration that "`the absence of a state law claim [is] not fatal'" to the application of Burford abstention
  5. Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat, Inc.

    429 U.S. 477 (1977)   Cited 2,063 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mere economic loss does not amount to an antitrust injury under the antitrust laws
  6. California Transport v. Trucking Unlimited

    404 U.S. 508 (1972)   Cited 1,580 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the right to petition extends to all departments of the Government," including the courts
  7. Verizon Comm. v. Law Offices of Trinko

    540 U.S. 398 (2004)   Cited 506 times   54 Legal Analyses
    Holding even a monopolist has no duty to cooperate with rivals
  8. 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”
  9. 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
  10. Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc.

    499 U.S. 365 (1991)   Cited 550 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is no "conspiracy" exception to the Noerr-Pennington doctrine
  11. 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 345,805 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
  12. Section 2201 - Creation of remedy

    28 U.S.C. § 2201   Cited 24,530 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment
  13. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,383 times   30 Legal Analyses
    In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.
  14. Section 1 - Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 1   Cited 2,903 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Making illegal "[e]very contract, combination ..., or conspiracy, in restraint of trade"
  15. Section 26 - Injunctive relief for private parties; exception; costs

    15 U.S.C. § 26   Cited 1,450 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing injunctive relief against "threatened loss or damage by a violation of the antitrust laws"
  16. Section 1060 - Generally

    Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1060   Cited 1,193 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a party who desires a declaration of his or her rights or duties with respect to another to ask for such a declaration, either alone or with other relief
  17. Section 12 - Definitions; short title

    15 U.S.C. § 12   Cited 904 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the statute only applies to an express list of federal law
  18. Section 34 - Definitions applicable to sections 34 to 36

    15 U.S.C. § 34   Cited 123 times
    Defining "local government" to include various entities "established by State law in one or more States"
  19. Section 36 - Recovery of damages, etc., for antitrust violations on claim against person based on official action directed by local government, or official or employee thereof acting in an official capacity

    15 U.S.C. § 36   Cited 29 times

    (a) Prohibition in general No damages, interest on damages, costs or attorney's fees may be recovered under section 4, 4A, or 4C of the Clayton Act ( 15 U.S.C. 15, 15a, or 15c ) in any claim against a person based on any official action directed by a local government, or official or employee thereof acting in an official capacity. (b) Nonapplication of prohibition for cases commenced before effective date of provisions Subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to cases commenced before the effective

  20. Section 1797 - Short title

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 1797   Cited 15 times

    This division shall be known and may be cited as the Emergency Medical Services System and the Prehospital Emergency Medical Care Personnel Act. Ca. Health and Saf. Code § 1797 Amended by Stats. 1986, Ch. 248, Sec. 121.