20 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 262,920 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 276,185 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
Hope v. Pelzer
536 U.S. 730 (2002) Cited 7,623 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he obvious cruelty inherent" in putting inmates in certain wantonly "degrading and dangerous" situations provides officers "with some notice that their alleged conduct violate" the Eighth Amendment
Anderson v. District Board of Trustees of Central Florida Community College
77 F.3d 364 (11th Cir. 1996) Cited 935 times
Holding that plaintiffs are required to "present each claim for relief in a separate count" rather than asserting numerous claims within a single count
Niehus v. Liberio
973 F.2d 526 (7th Cir. 1992) Cited 108 times
Holding that a wife, who attributed the breakup of her marriage to psychological consequences of her husband's injury at defendants' hands, could not recover damages under the Constitution for loss of consortium
Gates v. Foley
247 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1971) Cited 156 times
Granting wife right of action for loss of husband's consortium
Crawford v. City of Tampa
397 F. App'x 621 (11th Cir. 2010) Cited 25 times
Affirming dismissal of pro se complaint alleging disparate treatment when plaintiff "failed to identify appropriate comparators whose treatment would indicate race-based disparity"
Pattee v. Georgia Ports Authority
477 F. Supp. 2d 1272 (S.D. Ga. 2007) Cited 13 times
Allowing a loss of consortium claim based on § 1983 claim to proceed
Bratt v. Genovese
Case No: 8:13-cv-3210-T-36AEP (M.D. Fla. Dec. 3, 2014) Cited 4 times
Case No: 8:13-cv-3210-T-36AEP 12-03-2014 MICHAEL BRATT and MARJORIE YOUMANS, Plaintiffs, v. LOUIS GENOVESE, STEVEN GEORGE, KENNETH VAN TASSEL and JOHN GORE, Defendants. Charlene Edwards Honeywell United States District Judge ORDER This cause comes before the Court upon the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. Defendant Kenneth Van Tassel seeks to dismiss Counts VI, VII, and IX of the Complaint (Doc. 5), and Defendants Steve George, John Gore, and Louis Genovese seek to dismiss Counts VII and IX of the
Jenkins v. Carruth
583 F. Supp. 613 (E.D. Tenn. 1982) Cited 39 times
Concluding that a husband did not have standing to assert claims under § 1983 for the alleged "deprivation by a third party of the civil rights of his wife"
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 500,574 times 705 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
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 357,280 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 161,761 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 10 - Form of Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 10 Cited 20,242 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding exhibits attached to complaint may be treated as part of complaint for purposes of ruling on 12(b) motion

Coipel et al v. Carpenter et al

20 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 "[t]he obvious cruelty inherent" in putting inmates in certain wantonly "degrading and dangerous" situations provides officers "with some notice that their alleged conduct violate" the Eighth Amendment

Holding that plaintiffs are required to "present each claim for relief in a separate count" rather than asserting numerous claims within a single count

Holding that a wife, who attributed the breakup of her marriage to psychological consequences of her husband's injury at defendants' hands, could not recover damages under the Constitution for loss of consortium

Granting wife right of action for loss of husband's consortium

Affirming dismissal of pro se complaint alleging disparate treatment when plaintiff "failed to identify appropriate comparators whose treatment would indicate race-based disparity"

Allowing a loss of consortium claim based on § 1983 claim to proceed

Concluding that a husband did not have standing to assert claims under § 1983 for the alleged "deprivation by a third party of the civil rights of his wife"

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

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. . . ."

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