20 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 267,813 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 280,791 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
N Y Univ v. Continental Ins Co.
87 N.Y.2d 308 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 1,944 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations Of breach of contract "and any covenants implied" do not sound in fraud
Yusuf v. Vassar College
35 F.3d 709 (2d Cir. 1994) Cited 684 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a plaintiff can allege multiple theories for his or her claim, but under any theory "wholly conclusory allegations [will not] suffice for purposes of Rule 12(b)"
Samiento v. World Yacht Inc.
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1258 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 289 times 12 Legal Analyses
Affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because such an action does not lie where the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law
Chamberlain v. City of White Plains
986 F. Supp. 2d 363 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) Cited 220 times
Holding the mere mention of distributees in a complaint was insufficient to allege pecuniary loss
In re Vebeliunas
332 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2003) Cited 215 times
Finding defendant's silence could not give rise to equitable estoppel because defendant had no duty to speak
Doe v. University of South
687 F. Supp. 2d 744 (E.D. Tenn. 2009) Cited 76 times
Holding that the plaintiffs had failed to raise a viable promissory estoppel claim where they did not plead "facts to support a finding that the [defendant's] conduct is the equivalent to fraud"
Gally v. Columbia University
22 F. Supp. 2d 199 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) Cited 105 times
Holding "the mere allegation of mistreatment without the identification of a specific breached promise or obligation does not state a claim on which relief can be granted" and noting "general promises about ethical standards" are unenforceable
Spiteri v. Russo
12-CV-2780 (MKB) (RLM) (E.D.N.Y. Sep. 7, 2013) Cited 48 times
Holding Rooker-Feldman inapplicable to a claim challenging the plaintiff's designation as a sex offender because "[t]he issue before [the presiding judge] was Plaintiff's risk level classification, not whether he was required to register as a sex offender"
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 164,455 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1681 - Sex
20 U.S.C. § 1681 Cited 4,562 times 81 Legal Analyses
Referencing application of Title IX prohibitions to school admissions

Doe v. Columbia University and Trustees of Columbia University

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 allegations Of breach of contract "and any covenants implied" do not sound in fraud

Holding that a plaintiff can allege multiple theories for his or her claim, but under any theory "wholly conclusory allegations [will not] suffice for purposes of Rule 12(b)"

Affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because such an action does not lie where the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law

Holding the mere mention of distributees in a complaint was insufficient to allege pecuniary loss

Finding defendant's silence could not give rise to equitable estoppel because defendant had no duty to speak

Holding that the plaintiffs had failed to raise a viable promissory estoppel claim where they did not plead "facts to support a finding that the [defendant's] conduct is the equivalent to fraud"

Holding "the mere allegation of mistreatment without the identification of a specific breached promise or obligation does not state a claim on which relief can be granted" and noting "general promises about ethical standards" are unenforceable

Holding Rooker-Feldman inapplicable to a claim challenging the plaintiff's designation as a sex offender because "[t]he issue before [the presiding judge] was Plaintiff's risk level classification, not whether he was required to register as a sex offender"

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Referencing application of Title IX prohibitions to school admissions