31 Cited authorities

Scheuer v. Rhodes
416 U.S. 232 (1974) Cited 22,263 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that executive branch officers had qualified immunity
Conley v. Gibson
355 U.S. 41 (1957) Cited 58,446 times 25 Legal Analyses
Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"
Aqua Stoli Shipping Ltd. v. Gardner Smith Pty Ltd.
460 F.3d 434 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 248 times
Holding that "Rule B specifies the sum total of what must be shown for a valid maritime attachment"
Swift Co. v. Compania Caribe
339 U.S. 684 (1950) Cited 342 times
Holding that an order vacating an attachment is appealable as a collateral order
Dow Chemical Pacific v. Rascator Maritime S.A
782 F.2d 329 (2d Cir. 1986) Cited 323 times
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that motion to set aside default made at least seven months after defendant learned of entry of default was not made within a reasonable time
Ingersoll Milling Machine Co. v. M/V Bodena
829 F.2d 293 (2d Cir. 1987) Cited 217 times
Holding that "ambiguity" in an insurance policy precluded a finding of bad faith
Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
776 F.2d 383 (2d Cir. 1985) Cited 141 times
Holding to award attorney's fees on the basis of bad faith, the court must find clear evidence that the claim was "entirely without color."
Wajilam Exports
475 F. Supp. 2d 275 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) Cited 76 times
Holding that where attachment is based on a fraud theory of veil piercing, plaintiff should not be required to allege fraud with particularity before discovery
Filus v. Lot Polish Airlines
907 F.2d 1328 (2d Cir. 1990) Cited 64 times
Reversing dismissal so that plaintiffs could serve interrogatories to establish the defendant's contacts with the United States
Salazar v. Atlantic Sun
881 F.2d 73 (3d Cir. 1989) Cited 51 times
Holding that a district court's confirmation order of its prior interlocutory sale order was appealable under § 1292 because the confirmation order effectively terminated the owner's rights to title and possession of the vessel
Rule 13 - Counterclaim and Crossclaim
Fed. R. Civ. P. 13 Cited 4,915 times 21 Legal Analyses
Determining whether counterclaims are compulsory

Flame SA v. Lynx M/V

31 Cited authorities

Holding that executive branch officers had qualified immunity

Holding that "a complaint should not be dismissed for failure to state a claim unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief"

Holding that "Rule B specifies the sum total of what must be shown for a valid maritime attachment"

Holding that an order vacating an attachment is appealable as a collateral order

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that motion to set aside default made at least seven months after defendant learned of entry of default was not made within a reasonable time

Holding that "ambiguity" in an insurance policy precluded a finding of bad faith

Holding to award attorney's fees on the basis of bad faith, the court must find clear evidence that the claim was "entirely without color."

Holding that where attachment is based on a fraud theory of veil piercing, plaintiff should not be required to allege fraud with particularity before discovery

Reversing dismissal so that plaintiffs could serve interrogatories to establish the defendant's contacts with the United States

Holding that a district court's confirmation order of its prior interlocutory sale order was appealable under § 1292 because the confirmation order effectively terminated the owner's rights to title and possession of the vessel

Determining whether counterclaims are compulsory