44 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 253,484 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
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 267,331 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' "
Santiago v. Warminster Township
629 F.3d 121 (3d Cir. 2010) Cited 4,227 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Court should disregard "'naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement' and 'threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.'" (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678)
Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.
467 U.S. 752 (1984) Cited 1,434 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that a parent and a wholly owned subsidiary have a "complete unity of interest" because "their objectives are common" and "their general corporate actions are guided or determined not by two separate corporate consciousness, but one"
Lum v. Bank of Am.
361 F.3d 217 (3d Cir. 2004) Cited 2,091 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "mak[ing] general claims that defendants misrepresented that the prime rate is the lowest rate charged to their most creditworthy customers" does not satisfy the Rule 9(b) standard because "they do not indicate the date, time, or place of the alleged misrepresentations, the financial transactions in connection with which these misrepresentations were made, or who made the misrepresentation to whom"
Kach v. Hose ex rel. St. Moritz Security Services, Inc.
589 F.3d 626 (3d Cir. 2009) Cited 1,641 times
Holding that because the record "leaves no room for doubt that [defendant] was bent on a singularly personal frolic," his conduct was "not cognizable as state action for § 1983 purposes"
Bruno v. Erie Ins. Co.
106 A.3d 48 (Pa. 2014) Cited 387 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that the claim was not barred, in part, because it was not founded on the breach of any specific executory promise contained in the contract
Benak ex Rel. Alliance v. Alliance Capital
435 F.3d 396 (3d Cir. 2006) Cited 325 times
Holding dismissal is appropriate where "it appears to a certainty that no relief could be granted under any set of facts which could be proved."
Crouse v. Cyclops Industries
560 Pa. 394 (Pa. 2000) Cited 363 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the commencement of the limitations period may be determined as a matter of law "where the facts are so clear that reasonable minds cannot differ."
Bortz v. Noon
556 Pa. 489 (Pa. 1999) Cited 353 times
Adopting Restatement (Second) Torts § 552
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 346,675 times 923 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,974 times 317 Legal Analyses
Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Burnard et al v. Wells Fargo Advisors, Llc et al

44 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

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' "

Holding that the Court should disregard "'naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement' and 'threadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements.'" (quoting Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678)

Holding that a parent and a wholly owned subsidiary have a "complete unity of interest" because "their objectives are common" and "their general corporate actions are guided or determined not by two separate corporate consciousness, but one"

Holding that because the record "leaves no room for doubt that [defendant] was bent on a singularly personal frolic," his conduct was "not cognizable as state action for § 1983 purposes"

Holding that the claim was not barred, in part, because it was not founded on the breach of any specific executory promise contained in the contract

Holding dismissal is appropriate where "it appears to a certainty that no relief could be granted under any set of facts which could be proved."

Holding that the commencement of the limitations period may be determined as a matter of law "where the facts are so clear that reasonable minds cannot differ."

Adopting Restatement (Second) Torts § 552

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

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"