67 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 255,028 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
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 268,776 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' "
Neitzke v. Williams
490 U.S. 319 (1989) Cited 56,177 times
Holding that "an in forma pauperis pro se complaint may only be dismissed as frivolous ... when the petitioner cannot make any claim with a rational or arguable basis in law or in fact"
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A.
534 U.S. 506 (2002) Cited 16,866 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"
Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America
511 U.S. 375 (1994) Cited 19,218 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that absent a reservation of jurisdiction in the stipulated dismissal order, federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider enforcement of a settlement agreement
Will v. Michigan Dept. of State Police
491 U.S. 58 (1989) Cited 24,327 times
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
Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan
536 U.S. 101 (2002) Cited 10,311 times 31 Legal Analyses
Holding limitations period for hostile-work-environment claim runs from the last act composing the claim
Arbaugh v. Y H Corp.
546 U.S. 500 (2006) Cited 7,915 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”
Papasan v. Allain
478 U.S. 265 (1986) Cited 16,793 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"
Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.
557 U.S. 167 (2009) Cited 4,497 times 83 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act's language "because of such individual's age," required plaintiff show "age was the ‘but-for’ cause of the employer's adverse decision"
Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
42 U.S.C. § 1983 Cited 490,094 times 693 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation
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 348,310 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
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 157,506 times 196 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1331 - Federal question
28 U.S.C. § 1331 Cited 97,961 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."
Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction
28 U.S.C. § 1367 Cited 62,270 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"
Section 2000e-2 - Unlawful employment practices
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 Cited 28,433 times 171 Legal Analyses
Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”
Section 2000e-5 - Enforcement provisions
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5 Cited 26,970 times 124 Legal Analyses
Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires
Section 12112 - Discrimination
42 U.S.C. § 12112 Cited 13,592 times 159 Legal Analyses
Recognizing failure to accommodate as form of discrimination
Section 623 - Prohibition of age discrimination
29 U.S.C. § 623 Cited 10,116 times 51 Legal Analyses
Holding that under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against individuals who are at least forty years of age
Section 2302 - Prohibited personnel practices
5 U.S.C. § 2302 Cited 1,496 times 20 Legal Analyses
Protecting the disclosure of "any violation of any law, rule, or regulation ... if such disclosure is not specifically prohibited by law"
Section 1630.2 - Definitions
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2 Cited 8,354 times 141 Legal Analyses
Holding that major life activity is substantially limited if plaintiff is "significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities"

French v. Washington State Department of Health

67 Cited authorities

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

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 "an in forma pauperis pro se complaint may only be dismissed as frivolous ... when the petitioner cannot make any claim with a rational or arguable basis in law or in fact"

Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"

Holding that absent a reservation of jurisdiction in the stipulated dismissal order, federal courts lack jurisdiction to consider enforcement of a settlement agreement

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

Holding limitations period for hostile-work-environment claim runs from the last act composing the claim

Holding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”

Holding that Ex parte Young would not support a suit against a state for ongoing liability for an alleged past breach of trust, since "continuing payment of the income from the lost corpus is essentially equivalent in economic terms to a one-time restoration of the lost corpus itself"

Holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act's language "because of such individual's age," required plaintiff show "age was the ‘but-for’ cause of the employer's adverse decision"

Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

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

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."

Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”

Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires

Recognizing failure to accommodate as form of discrimination

Holding that under the ADEA, it is unlawful to discriminate against individuals who are at least forty years of age

Protecting the disclosure of "any violation of any law, rule, or regulation ... if such disclosure is not specifically prohibited by law"

Holding that major life activity is substantially limited if plaintiff is "significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities"