60 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 254,855 times 280 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 268,629 times 367 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' "
Pearson v. Callahan
555 U.S. 223 (2009) Cited 22,623 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court may, without deciding whether there was a constitutional violation, look to the question of whether that right was "clearly established"
Ashcroft v. Al-Kidd
563 U.S. 731 (2011) Cited 9,044 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to be clearly established, "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate"
Harlow v. Fitzgerald
457 U.S. 800 (1982) Cited 31,584 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that public officials are entitled to a "qualified immunity" from "liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . rights of which a reasonable person would have known"
Kentucky v. Graham
473 U.S. 159 (1985) Cited 19,325 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity," and that "a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself"
Anderson v. Creighton
483 U.S. 635 (1987) Cited 15,476 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"
Bivens v. Six Unknown Fed. Narcotics Agents
403 U.S. 388 (1971) Cited 25,980 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that there is an implied cause of action for money damages against federal officials for violations of the Fourth Amendment
Malley v. Briggs
475 U.S. 335 (1986) Cited 9,241 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a reasonably well-trained officer who would have known that his affidavit failed to establish probable cause and that he shouldn't have applied for a warrant violates an arrestee's Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable seizures and does not enjoy qualified immunity when he arrests someone based on the warrant he nonetheless procured from a judicial officer
Los Angeles v. Lyons
461 U.S. 95 (1983) Cited 7,549 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold
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 348,148 times 929 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 69,669 times 123 Legal Analyses
Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
Section 2000cc - Protection of land use as religious exercise
42 U.S.C. § 2000cc Cited 2,937 times 40 Legal Analyses
Requiring comparison with a "nonreligious assembly or institution"
Section 2000bb - Congressional findings and declaration of purposes
42 U.S.C. § 2000bb Cited 1,546 times 18 Legal Analyses
Finding that in Smith, "the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion"
Section 2000bb-1 - Free exercise of religion protected
42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-1 Cited 1,124 times 27 Legal Analyses
Providing for "appropriate relief" in judicial suit
Section 2000bb-2 - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 2000bb-2 Cited 213 times 2 Legal Analyses
Cross-referencing § 2000cc–5

Cherri et al v. Mueller, III et al

60 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 a court may, without deciding whether there was a constitutional violation, look to the question of whether that right was "clearly established"

Holding that, to be clearly established, "existing precedent must have placed the statutory or constitutional question beyond debate"

Holding that public officials are entitled to a "qualified immunity" from "liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established . . . rights of which a reasonable person would have known"

Holding that "an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity," and that "a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself"

Holding that an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if "a reasonable officer could have believed" that the search was lawful "in light of clearly established law and the information the searching officers possessed"

Holding that there is an implied cause of action for money damages against federal officials for violations of the Fourth Amendment

Holding there is no justiciable controversy where plaintiff had once been subjected to a chokehold

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

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Requiring comparison with a "nonreligious assembly or institution"

Finding that in Smith, "the Supreme Court virtually eliminated the requirement that the government justify burdens on religious exercise imposed by laws neutral toward religion"

Providing for "appropriate relief" in judicial suit

Cross-referencing § 2000cc–5