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

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

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' "

Hospital Building Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital

Holding that a conspiracy against a North Carolina hospital had "a substantial effect on interstate commerce," and hence was covered by the Sherman Act, because it could, inter alia, reduce the hospital's purchases of out-of-state medicines and supplies

American Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.

Holding that the “respondent's state-law claims are barred by the filed rate doctrine”

Morley v. Walker

Holding that, in light of the fact that all allegations in the complaint must be regarded as true on a motion to dismiss, "dismissal [on qualified immunity grounds] for failure to state a claim under 12(b) is inappropriate."

Tanner v. Heise

Treating a "motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment and apply[ing] the standard of Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in [court of appeals'] de novo review of the Rule 12(b) dismissal"

Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. v. Catellus Development Corp.

Holding that "disposal" under § 9607 includes a party's movement and spreading of contaminated soil to uncontaminated portions of property and that "Congress did not limit [`disposal'] to the initial introduction of hazardous material onto property"

State of Ill. ex Rel. Burris v. Panhandle E

Finding "the presence of a legitimate business justification reduces the likelihood that the conduct will produce undesirable effects on the competitive process"; "[w]hether valid business reasons motivated a monopolist's conduct is a question of fact" for a factfinder

Eklund v. Trost

Holding that an officer had a duty to protect a person injured by the driver of a car the officer was pursuing in a high-speed chase because a special relationship existed based on statute

Medco Energi US, L.L.C. v. Sea Robin Pipeline Co.

Concluding that the plaintiff's claim against regulated entity for "misrepresentation about repair times, though ‘extra-contractual,’ involve the specific subject matter of the tariff [concerning interruptible pipeline service]"

Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

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

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

Rule 14 - Third-Party Practice

Striking improper third-party claim is appropriate remedy

Section 27-1-107 - Kinds of relief - when given