550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 269,161 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' "
Holding that fraud claims were pled with particularity when the allegations concerned a "relatively definite time frame" identifiable by discrete events, even though exact dates were not provided
Holding that there is no separate cause of action for civil conspiracy, and that to establish such an action, a plaintiff must show some other underlying tort or civil wrong
Holding that state court's determination that trial court did not err in refusing to give a jury instruction based on construction of state statute did not warrant federal habeas review
Holding Missouri did not have a real interest in applying its law regarding damages limitation with respect to an accident that occurred in Missouri, because the defendant was a resident of Ohio and Missouri's interest was to shield Missouri residents from liability
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 91,342 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Providing that “[t]he directors of a foreign corporation transacting intrastate business are liable to the corporation, its shareholders, creditors, receiver, liquidator or trustee in bankruptcy for ... [any] violation of official duty according to any applicable laws of the state or place of incorporation or organization, whether committed or done in this state or elsewhere”