74 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 263,477 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 276,716 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
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 115,098 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Associated General Contractors v. Carpenters
459 U.S. 519 (1983) Cited 5,174 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union lacked standing to sue for injuries passed on to it by intermediaries
Burtch v. Milberg Factors, Inc.
662 F.3d 212 (3d Cir. 2011) Cited 2,270 times
Holding that direct evidence of a conspiracy was lacking where the complaint's allegations did not "specify a time or place that any actual agreement to fix credit terms occurred, [or] ...indicate that any particular individuals or [organizations] made such an agreement"
Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.
465 U.S. 752 (1984) Cited 1,195 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff in a vertical price-fixing case must produce evidence which "tends to exclude the possibility of independent action"
Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.
551 U.S. 877 (2007) Cited 468 times 77 Legal Analyses
Holding that the rule of reason rather than per se illegality applies to vertical price restraints
In re Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation
618 F.3d 300 (3d Cir. 2010) Cited 1,486 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that per se "hub and spoke" theory was not properly pled when complaint detailed specific agreements between multiple insurers and a single broker, but did not allege facts such that the court could infer that the insurers had agreed horizontally to enter into their respective agreements with the broker
Continental T. V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc.
433 U.S. 36 (1977) Cited 994 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that vertical nonprice restraints are subject to the rule of reason
Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp.
472 U.S. 585 (1985) Cited 614 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding that predatory conduct to attain or preserve a monopoly is a prerequisite to a finding of monopolization or attempted monopolization
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 357,835 times 950 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 162,084 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 39,880 times 331 Legal Analyses
Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity
Rule 401 - Test for Relevant Evidence
Fed. R. Evid. 401 Cited 13,843 times 36 Legal Analyses
Noting that evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a material fact more or less probable
Rule 104 - Preliminary Questions
Fed. R. Evid. 104 Cited 3,406 times 13 Legal Analyses
Noting that, in making preliminary determinations relevant to admissibility, "the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege"

Brewer Body Shop, LLC et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al

74 Cited authorities

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

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

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that a union lacked standing to sue for injuries passed on to it by intermediaries

Holding that direct evidence of a conspiracy was lacking where the complaint's allegations did not "specify a time or place that any actual agreement to fix credit terms occurred, [or] ...indicate that any particular individuals or [organizations] made such an agreement"

Holding that a plaintiff in a vertical price-fixing case must produce evidence which "tends to exclude the possibility of independent action"

Holding that the rule of reason rather than per se illegality applies to vertical price restraints

Holding that vertical nonprice restraints are subject to the rule of reason

Holding that predatory conduct to attain or preserve a monopoly is a prerequisite to a finding of monopolization or attempted monopolization

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

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

Noting that evidence is relevant if it has any tendency to make a material fact more or less probable

Noting that, in making preliminary determinations relevant to admissibility, "the court is not bound by evidence rules, except those on privilege"