37 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 267,100 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 280,127 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
Christopher v. Harbury
536 U.S. 403 (2002) Cited 5,254 times
Holding that the complaint failed to state an actionable claim, and noting: "The petitioners did not challenge below the existence of a cause of action under Bivens ..., and we express no opinion on the matter in deciding this case."
American Pipe Construction Co. v. Utah
414 U.S. 538 (1974) Cited 2,169 times 164 Legal Analyses
Holding the commencement of a class action "suspends the applicable statute of limitations as to all asserted members of the class who would have been parties had the suit been permitted to continue as a class action"
Plotkin v. IP Axess Inc.
407 F.3d 690 (5th Cir. 2005) Cited 1,042 times
Holding that a plaintiff must plead with “specificity as to the statements (or omissions) considered to be fraudulent, the speaker, when and why the statements were made, and an explanation of why they were fraudulent.”
Gentilello v. Rege
627 F.3d 540 (5th Cir. 2010) Cited 773 times
Holding that the standard for deciding a Rule 12(c) motion is the same as for deciding a Rule 12(b) motion
DeJesus v. HF Mgmt. Servs., LLC
726 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2013) Cited 447 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[w]hatever the precise level of specificity that was required of the complaint, Dejesus at least was required to do more than repeat the language of the statute"
Hoffmann v. Sbarro, Inc.
982 F. Supp. 249 (S.D.N.Y. 1997) Cited 579 times
Holding there is “no question, therefore, that plaintiffs have shown a factual nexus between their situation and the situation of other current and former” employees where defendant admitted it had a uniform policy regarding them all
Johnson v. Heckmann Water Resources (CVR), Inc.
758 F.3d 627 (5th Cir. 2014) Cited 178 times 5 Legal Analyses
Listing this as one of four elements of the prima facie case for an overtime claim
Pruell v. Caritas Christi
678 F.3d 10 (1st Cir. 2012) Cited 186 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding a simple statement that plaintiffs worked more than forty hours per week was inadequate to establish a FLSA claim where the complaint lacked examples or estimates of unpaid time to substantiate the claim
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 361,853 times 961 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 164,069 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 94,896 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 216 - Penalties
29 U.S.C. § 216 Cited 16,925 times 143 Legal Analyses
Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”
Section 207 - Maximum hours
29 U.S.C. § 207 Cited 10,824 times 231 Legal Analyses
Establishing overtime rules
Section 213 - Exemptions
29 U.S.C. § 213 Cited 4,714 times 261 Legal Analyses
Exempting from provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act "any employee employed on a casual basis in domestic service employment to provide companionship services for individuals who (because of age or infirmity) are unable to care for themselves (as such terms are defined and delimited by regulations of the Secretary)"
Section 10101 - Rail transportation policy
49 U.S.C. § 10101 Cited 800 times 15 Legal Analyses
Articulating objective of "promot[ing] a safe and efficient rail transportation system by allowing rail carriers to earn adequate revenues"
Section 181 - Application of subchapter I to carriers by air
45 U.S.C. § 181 Cited 466 times 5 Legal Analyses
Amending RLA to apply to interstate air carriers
Section 31502 - Requirements for qualifications, hours of service, safety, and equipment standards
49 U.S.C. § 31502 Cited 327 times 3 Legal Analyses
Granting Secretary of Transportation authority to prescribe maximum hours for motor carrier employees

Cook et al v. Flight Services And Systems, Inc.

37 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 the complaint failed to state an actionable claim, and noting: "The petitioners did not challenge below the existence of a cause of action under Bivens ..., and we express no opinion on the matter in deciding this case."

Holding the commencement of a class action "suspends the applicable statute of limitations as to all asserted members of the class who would have been parties had the suit been permitted to continue as a class action"

Holding that a plaintiff must plead with “specificity as to the statements (or omissions) considered to be fraudulent, the speaker, when and why the statements were made, and an explanation of why they were fraudulent.”

Holding that the standard for deciding a Rule 12(c) motion is the same as for deciding a Rule 12(b) motion

Holding that "[w]hatever the precise level of specificity that was required of the complaint, Dejesus at least was required to do more than repeat the language of the statute"

Holding there is “no question, therefore, that plaintiffs have shown a factual nexus between their situation and the situation of other current and former” employees where defendant admitted it had a uniform policy regarding them all

Listing this as one of four elements of the prima facie case for an overtime claim

Holding a simple statement that plaintiffs worked more than forty hours per week was inadequate to establish a FLSA claim where the complaint lacked examples or estimates of unpaid time to substantiate the claim

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

Holding employers liable for “unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation”

Establishing overtime rules

Articulating objective of "promot[ing] a safe and efficient rail transportation system by allowing rail carriers to earn adequate revenues"

Amending RLA to apply to interstate air carriers

Granting Secretary of Transportation authority to prescribe maximum hours for motor carrier employees