54 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 262,161 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 275,491 times   368 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
  3. Lewis v. Casey

    518 U.S. 343 (1996)   Cited 14,578 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a prisoner must show an actual injury to state a claim for denial of access to courts
  4. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

    528 U.S. 167 (2000)   Cited 7,372 times   25 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plaintiffs who curtailed their recreational activities on a river due to reasonable concerns about the effect of pollutant discharges into that river had standing
  5. Gen. Tel. Co. of Sw. v. Falcon

    457 U.S. 147 (1982)   Cited 5,753 times   33 Legal Analyses
    Holding that named plaintiff must prove “much more than the validity of his own claim”; the individual plaintiff must show that “the individual's claim and the class claims will share common questions of law or fact and that the individual's claim will be typical of the class claims,” explicitly referencing the “commonality” and “typicality” requirements of Rule 23
  6. Associated General Contractors v. Carpenters

    459 U.S. 519 (1983)   Cited 5,162 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union lacked standing to sue for injuries passed on to it by intermediaries
  7. Lacey v. Maricopa Cnty.

    693 F.3d 896 (9th Cir. 2012)   Cited 7,920 times
    Holding that "claims [that are] voluntarily dismissed" are "waived if not repled" in an amended complaint"
  8. Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc.

    504 U.S. 451 (1992)   Cited 2,316 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "it is clearly reasonable to infer that [the defendant] has market power to raise prices and drive out competition in the aftermarkets" for service and parts despite an undisputed lack of market power in the initial product
  9. Raines v. Byrd

    521 U.S. 811 (1997)   Cited 1,819 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding specifically and only that "individual members of Congress [lack] Article III standing"
  10. United States v. Grinnell Corp.

    384 U.S. 563 (1966)   Cited 2,674 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding a series of three acquisitions "eliminated any possibility of an outbreak of competition" and thereby "perfected the monopoly power to exclude competitors and fix prices."
  11. 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 356,490 times   945 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 161,322 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
  13. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,207 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices
  14. Section 15 - Suits by persons injured

    15 U.S.C. § 15   Cited 5,736 times   35 Legal Analyses
    Granting private right of action to anyone who has been injured "by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws ..."
  15. Section 17043 - Unlawful sale or gift for purpose of destroying competition

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17043   Cited 111 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In section 17043, in contrast, the very gravamen of the offense is the purpose underlying the anticompetitive act, rather than the actual or threatened harm to competition.
  16. Section 17044 - Unlawful sale or use of "loss leader"

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17044   Cited 38 times

    It is unlawful for any person engaged in business within this State to sell or use any article or product as a "loss leader" as defined in Section 17030 of this chapter. Ca. Bus. and Prof'l. Code § 17044 Amended by Stats. 1953, Ch. 334.

  17. Section 17082 - Actual damages; treble damages; attorney's fees

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17082   Cited 35 times
    Providing for treble damages "[i]n any action under this chapter," which does not include § 17200