§Why CasetextPricing

Boessenecker et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank

RESPONSE

25 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,459 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 266,381 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. Erickson v. Pardus

    551 U.S. 89 (2007)   Cited 61,580 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"

  4. Scheuer v. Rhodes

    416 U.S. 232 (1974)   Cited 22,280 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that executive branch officers had qualified immunity

  5. Conley v. Gibson

    355 U.S. 41 (1957)   Cited 58,488 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

  6. Davis v. Scherer

    468 U.S. 183 (1984)   Cited 3,687 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the only relevant inquiry is whether federal law rights are clearly established; it does not matter that the officer simultaneously violates state law rights that are clearly established

  7. Balistreri v. Pacifica Police Dept

    901 F.2d 696 (9th Cir. 1988)   Cited 15,982 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a cognizable gender discrimination claim could be brought by a female domestic violence victim where the victim alleged police denied protection and made misogynistic comments including that "he did not blame [the victim's] husband for hitting her, because of the way she was 'carrying on'"

  8. Merrill v. Navegar, Inc.

    26 Cal.4th 465 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 1,230 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Restating the same criteria for exceptions from the rule set forth in section 1714

  9. Gilligan v. Jamco Development Corp.

    108 F.3d 246 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 958 times
    Setting forth elements of a FHA claim

  10. Nymark v. Heart Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n

    231 Cal.App.3d 1089 (Cal. Ct. App. 1991)   Cited 1,045 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, ordinarily, a financial institution acting within the scope of its conventional activities as a lender owes no duty of care to a borrower

  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 345,620 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 2605 - Servicing of mortgage loans and administration of escrow accounts

    12 U.S.C. § 2605   Cited 3,719 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Describing "qualified written request"

  13. Section 2601 - Congressional findings and purpose

    12 U.S.C. § 2601   Cited 3,441 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Providing purpose of RESPA is "to effect certain changes in the settlement process for residential real estate"