Ashcroft v. Iqbal

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police

Holding that official capacity state officer suits for prospective injunctive relief are suits against a "person" under § 1983 even though a "State" is not a "person" under that statute

Walden v. Fiore

Holding that “the mere fact that [defendant's] conduct affected plaintiffs with connections to the forum State does not suffice to authorize jurisdiction.”

Kentucky v. Graham

Holding that "an official-capacity suit is, in all respects other than name, to be treated as a suit against the entity," and that "a plaintiff seeking to recover on a damages judgment in an official-capacity suit must look to the government entity itself"

Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz

Holding that a defendant has "fair warning" if he purposefully directs his activities at residents of the forum and if the litigation results from alleged injuries arising out of or relating to those activities.

Pennhurst State School Hosp. v. Halderman

Holding that sovereign immunity prohibits federal courts from "instruct[ing] state officials on how to conform their conduct to state law"

Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co.

Holding that, because "[t]hey keep the federal courts within the bounds the Constitution and Congress have prescribed," questions concerning subject matter jurisdiction "must be policed by the courts on their own initiative even at the highest level"

World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

Holding that an Oklahoma court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over a car retailer when the retailer's only connection to Oklahoma was the fact that a car sold in New York became involved in an accident in Oklahoma

Younger v. Harris

Holding that it was improper for the district court in that case to enjoin a state prosecution against Younger, in light of "the national policy forbidding federal courts to stay or enjoin pending state court proceedings except under special circumstances"

Hartman v. Moore

Holding that a Bivens remedy may be available for malicious prosecution, but the plaintiff had to allege and prove lack of probable cause

Section 1391 - Venue generally

Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

Section 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights

Concerning conspiracies to obstruct justice or intimidate a party, witness, or juror

Section 349 - Deceptive acts and practices unlawful

Granting "any person who has been injured by reason of any violation of this section" the right to "bring an action in his own name"

Section 1257 - State courts; certiorari

Holding that a final judgment rendered by the highest state court may only be reviewed by the United States Supreme Court

Section 78bb - Effect on existing law

Adopting definition of "covered security" found in paragraphs and of section 18(b) of the Securities Act of 1933

Section 63 - General duties

Specifying that in such circumstances the Attorney General or her deputy will exercise the powers the district attorney “would otherwise” hold, and the district attorney is limited to “exercise[ing] such powers . . . as are required of him by the attorney-general or the deputy attorney-general so attending”

Section 77p - Additional remedies; limitation on remedies

Allowing certain securities class actions to be removed to federal court

Section 404 - Objections in point of law

Section 17.041 - Definition

Defining "nonresident" by a nonexclusive list that includes other business organizations but does not expressly mention LLCs