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' "

Francis v. Giacomelli

Holding that the defendant was entitled to qualified immunity since "his actions were not clearly unlawful when performed"

Coleman v. Md. Court of Appeals

Holding that an African-American plaintiff's statement that he "was treated differently as a result of his race than whites" was too conclusory to state a claim of discrimination in the employment context

Katchen v. Landy

Holding that a bankruptcy referee could exercise what was known as “summary jurisdiction” over a voidable-preference claim brought by a bankruptcy trustee against a creditor who had filed a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding because the referee could not rule on the creditor's proof of claim without first resolving the voidable-preference issue

Ohio Valley Envtl. Coalition v. Aracoma

Holding that the court cannot "simply substitute the judgment of plaintiff's experts for that of the agency's experts" because the court must defer to agency choices and methodology

Chicot County Dist. v. Bank

Holding that courts' determinations of their own jurisdiction, "while open to direct review, may not be assailed collaterally"

R.G. Financial Corp. v. Vergara-Nunez

Holding mortgage servicer and mortgage holder were sufficiently identical under Puerto Rico law to justify precluding action by mortgagors to rescind under TILA where mortgage servicer had already secured a default judgment against the mortgagors in a foreclosure action

Stoll v. Gottlieb

Holding that “[a]fter a party has his day in court, with opportunity to present his evidence and his view of the law, a collateral attack upon the decision as to jurisdiction there rendered merely retries the issue previously determined”

Marshall v. Miller

Holding that trebling is automatic

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

Section 75-1.1 - Methods of competition, acts and practices regulated; legislative policy

Declaring unlawful "unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce"

Section 24-2 - Penalty for usury; corporate bonds may be sold below par