§Why CasetextPricing

Bloomfield Surgical Center v. Cigna Health And Life Insurance Company et al

BRIEF in Opposition

125 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 269,421 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts are not required "to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without reference to its factual context"

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 282,303 times   369 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  3. Hishon v. King Spalding

    467 U.S. 69 (1984)   Cited 12,588 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the right of expression does not permit selecting law firm partners in violation of Title VII

  4. Phillips v. County of Allegheny

    515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 17,589 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

  5. Aetna Health Inc. v. Davila

    542 U.S. 200 (2004)   Cited 2,802 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Holding that states cannot create new causes of action that conflict with ERISA's " ‘interlocking, interrelated, and interdependent remedial scheme,’ " located in § 502 of ERISA

  6. Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside

    578 F.3d 203 (3d Cir. 2009)   Cited 14,614 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion "in denying a motion for a class action determination which was untimely under the local rule"

  7. H. J. Inc. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co.

    492 U.S. 229 (1989)   Cited 3,697 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the continuity prong can be met by showing that related predicate offenses continued over a substantial period of time or posed a threat of continuing activity

  8. Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. Dedeaux

    481 U.S. 41 (1987)   Cited 3,739 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that civil enforcement scheme codified at § 502 is not to be supplemented by state law remedies

  9. Varity Corp. v. Howe

    516 U.S. 489 (1996)   Cited 2,432 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ERISA fiduciaries may have duties to disclose information about plan prospects that they have no duty, or even power, to change

  10. Great-West Life Annuity Ins. Co. v. Knudson

    534 U.S. 204 (2002)   Cited 1,723 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Holding an injunction ordering money funds to be legal relief because it sought to "impo[se] personal liability for the benefits that they conferred upon respondents"

  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 364,364 times   964 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 338,603 times   162 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  13. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 165,340 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  14. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 117,124 times   200 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  15. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 101,550 times   142 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  16. Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 15   Cited 95,623 times   92 Legal Analyses
    Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

  17. Section 1441 - Removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1441   Cited 52,048 times   154 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[a]ny civil action of which the district courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the ... laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties.”

  18. Section 1132 - Civil enforcement

    29 U.S.C. § 1132   Cited 26,841 times   176 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner

  19. Rule 78 - Hearing Motions; Submission on Briefs

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 78   Cited 24,367 times
    Providing that court may decide motions on written statements of reasons in support and opposition to expedite business

  20. Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions

    28 U.S.C. § 1446   Cited 22,922 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

  21. Section 2560.503-1 - Claims procedure

    29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1   Cited 2,900 times   79 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the requirements of 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1

  22. Section 2575.502c-1 - Adjusted civil penalty under section 502(c)(1)

    29 C.F.R. § 2575.502c-1   Cited 218 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Increasing maximum amount of civil penalty from $100 a day to $110 a day