34 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 252,784 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 266,697 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' "
Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,840 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.
572 U.S. 118 (2014) Cited 2,835 times 69 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff seeking to bring suit under a federal statute must show not only that he has standing under Article III, but also that his "complaint fall within the zone of interests protected by the law" invoked
Allen v. Wright
468 U.S. 737 (1984) Cited 4,756 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that, even when plaintiffs allege "one of the most serious injuries recognized in our legal system," it's not justiciable where "the chain of causation between the challenged Government conduct and the asserted injury are far too weak for the chain as a whole to sustain respondents' standing"
Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman
455 U.S. 363 (1982) Cited 2,029 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that an allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff organization "has had to devote significant resources to identify and counteract the defendant's" illegal practices was sufficient to confer standing to the organization in its own right at the pleading stage
Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Atonio
490 U.S. 642 (1989) Cited 979 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding causation was not demonstrated because plaintiffs had not disproved the possibility that the overrepresentation of minority workers in lower-paying cannery positions was caused by the company's contract with a predominantly non-White labor union
Savory v. Lyons
469 F.3d 667 (7th Cir. 2006) Cited 1,077 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that equitable tolling is appropriate "if plaintiff is unable to determine who caused his injury"
Trafficante v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
409 U.S. 205 (1972) Cited 786 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that plaintiffs not themselves the "direct objects of discrimination" have standing under the FHA
Keri v. Board of Trustees
458 F.3d 620 (7th Cir. 2006) Cited 450 times
Holding that terminating a professor for engaging in inappropriate conduct with students did not constitute extreme and outrageous conduct under Indiana law
Section 3601 - Declaration of policy
42 U.S.C. § 3601 Cited 3,994 times 44 Legal Analyses
Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”
Section 3613 - Enforcement by private persons
42 U.S.C. § 3613 Cited 1,540 times 6 Legal Analyses
Granting right to sue in state or federal court

County of Cook v. HSBC North America Holdings, Inc. et al

34 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 elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

Holding that a plaintiff seeking to bring suit under a federal statute must show not only that he has standing under Article III, but also that his "complaint fall within the zone of interests protected by the law" invoked

Holding that an allegation in the complaint that the plaintiff organization "has had to devote significant resources to identify and counteract the defendant's" illegal practices was sufficient to confer standing to the organization in its own right at the pleading stage

Holding causation was not demonstrated because plaintiffs had not disproved the possibility that the overrepresentation of minority workers in lower-paying cannery positions was caused by the company's contract with a predominantly non-White labor union

Holding that equitable tolling is appropriate "if plaintiff is unable to determine who caused his injury"

Holding that plaintiffs not themselves the "direct objects of discrimination" have standing under the FHA

Holding that terminating a professor for engaging in inappropriate conduct with students did not constitute extreme and outrageous conduct under Indiana law

Stating the FHA is intended to provide “fair housing throughout the United States”

Granting right to sue in state or federal court