48 Cited authorities

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"
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
Papasan v. Allain
478 U.S. 265 (1986) Cited 17,571 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"
Gordon v. Leeke
574 F.2d 1147 (4th Cir. 1978) Cited 7,211 times
Holding that a pro se litigant's pleadings should be construed liberally to avoid inequity
Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, Llp
584 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 923 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a consumer has a private right of action against a furnisher of credit information for willful or negligent noncompliance with the requirements in 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)
Chiang v. Verizon New Eng.
595 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2010) Cited 387 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in suits against furnishers and agencies alike, a plaintiff must "demonstrate some causal relationship between the ... allegedly unreasonable reinvestigation and the failure to discover inaccuracies in his account."
Seamans v. Temple Univ.
744 F.3d 853 (3d Cir. 2014) Cited 317 times
Holding that "FCRA explicitly precludes private suits for failure to comply with, 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(c), and instead provides for enforcement of that provision by federal and state officials, 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(d)."
Saunders v. Branch Banking
526 F.3d 142 (4th Cir. 2008) Cited 374 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a bank's internal records of ongoing correspondence could support a conclusion that the bank intended not to furnish accurate information to the reporting agencies
Nelson v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corp.
282 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 425 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding consumers have a private right of action against furnishers for violations of § 1681s-2(b)
Sucampo v. Astellas Pharma
471 F.3d 544 (4th Cir. 2006) Cited 319 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a forum-selection clause may be enforced “under Rule 12(b) as a motion to dismiss on the basis of improper venue”
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 963 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 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. . . ."
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
Section 1391 - Venue generally
28 U.S.C. § 1391 Cited 29,448 times 201 Legal Analyses
Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred
Rule 10 - Form of Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 10 Cited 20,785 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding exhibits attached to complaint may be treated as part of complaint for purposes of ruling on 12(b) motion
Section 1406 - Cure or waiver of defects
28 U.S.C. § 1406 Cited 15,082 times 55 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that transfer is proper to any district or division in which the action could have been brought
Section 1681 - Congressional findings and statement of purpose
15 U.S.C. § 1681 Cited 6,604 times 200 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the need to protect "the consumer's right to privacy"
Section 1681s-2 - Responsibilities of furnishers of information to consumer reporting agencies
15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2 Cited 3,025 times 44 Legal Analyses
Granting enforcement power to state and federal regulators

Brown v. Panther II Transportation, Inc/Panther Premium Logistics, Inc. et al

48 Cited authorities

Holding that courts are not required "to credit a complaint's conclusory statements without reference to its factual context"

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 Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"

Holding that a pro se litigant's pleadings should be construed liberally to avoid inequity

Holding that a consumer has a private right of action against a furnisher of credit information for willful or negligent noncompliance with the requirements in 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(b)

Holding that, in suits against furnishers and agencies alike, a plaintiff must "demonstrate some causal relationship between the ... allegedly unreasonable reinvestigation and the failure to discover inaccuracies in his account."

Holding that "FCRA explicitly precludes private suits for failure to comply with, 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(c), and instead provides for enforcement of that provision by federal and state officials, 15 U.S.C. § 1681s-2(d)."

Holding that a bank's internal records of ongoing correspondence could support a conclusion that the bank intended not to furnish accurate information to the reporting agencies

Holding consumers have a private right of action against furnishers for violations of § 1681s-2(b)

Holding that a forum-selection clause may be enforced “under Rule 12(b) as a motion to dismiss on the basis of improper venue”

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. . . ."

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

Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

Holding exhibits attached to complaint may be treated as part of complaint for purposes of ruling on 12(b) motion

Recognizing that transfer is proper to any district or division in which the action could have been brought

Recognizing the need to protect "the consumer's right to privacy"

Granting enforcement power to state and federal regulators