§Why CasetextPricing

Fair Housing Justice Center, Inc. v. Allure Rehabilitation Services Llc et al

MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction

65 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 255,314 times   280 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

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 269,063 times   367 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' "

  3. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 28,078 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"

  4. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs. (TOC), Inc.

    528 U.S. 167 (2000)   Cited 7,207 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. Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA

    568 U.S. 398 (2013)   Cited 3,117 times   169 Legal Analyses
    Holding that respondents could not establish injury by relying on a "speculative chain of possibilities"

  6. Daimlerchrysler Corp. v. Cuno

    547 U.S. 332 (2006)   Cited 2,692 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an injury a plaintiff "suffers in some indefinite way in common with people generally" is not a cognizable injury-in-fact

  7. Warth v. Seldin

    422 U.S. 490 (1975)   Cited 11,935 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Article III requires plaintiffs "to establish that, in fact, the asserted injury was the consequence of the defendants' actions"

  8. Whitmore v. Arkansas

    495 U.S. 149 (1990)   Cited 2,868 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a third party does not have "standing to challenge the validity of a death sentence imposed on a capital defendant who has elected to forgo his right of appeal"

  9. O'Shea v. Littleton

    414 U.S. 488 (1974)   Cited 4,109 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[p]ast exposure to illegal conduct does not in itself show a present case or controversy regarding injunctive relief ... if unaccompanied by any continuing, present adverse effects"

  10. Simon v. E. Ky. Welfare Rights Org.

    426 U.S. 26 (1976)   Cited 3,196 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiffs who sued IRS lacked standing where they hoped reversal of IRS rule would " ‘discourage’ hospitals from denying their services to" plaintiffs, but whether hospitals had denied services based on the existing rule remained unclear and, even if the rule were reversed, hospitals would remain free to not provide services to plaintiffs

  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 348,617 times   930 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 98,023 times   136 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  13. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 62,321 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

  14. Section 1391 - Venue generally

    28 U.S.C. § 1391   Cited 28,062 times   197 Legal Analyses
    Finding that venue lies where a "substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim" occurred

  15. Section 794 - Nondiscrimination under Federal grants and programs

    29 U.S.C. § 794   Cited 12,391 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Adopting ADA standards for Rehabilitation Act claims

  16. Section 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury

    28 U.S.C. § 1746   Cited 10,104 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Permitting the use of declarations instead

  17. Section 3604 - Discrimination in the sale or rental of housing and other prohibited practices

    42 U.S.C. § 3604   Cited 4,107 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Requiring any "accommodation" in "rules, policies, practices, or services" to be "reasonable"

  18. Section 794a - Remedies and attorney fees

    29 U.S.C. § 794a   Cited 1,809 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Adopting the "remedies, procedures, and rights" under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for federal employees filing civil actions

  19. Section 3613 - Enforcement by private persons

    42 U.S.C. § 3613   Cited 1,551 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Granting right to sue in state or federal court

  20. Section 3602 - Definitions

    42 U.S.C. § 3602   Cited 1,179 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Defining familial status

  21. Section 84.4 - [Effective until 7/8/2024] Discrimination prohibited

    45 C.F.R. § 84.4   Cited 133 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring recipients of federal financial assistance from the agency to "afford handicapped persons equal opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit, or to reach the same level of achievement [as non-handicapped persons], in the most integrated setting appropriate to the person's needs"

  22. Section 84.52 - [Effective until 7/8/2024] Health, welfare, and other social services

    45 C.F.R. § 84.52   Cited 74 times
    Stating that a recipient who provides health services cannot "[a]fford a qualified handicapped person an opportunity to receive benefits or services that is not equal to that offered nonhandicapped persons"