§Why CasetextPricing

Ginsburg v. Icc Holdings Llc et al

Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

51 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 255,202 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 268,948 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. Neitzke v. Williams

    490 U.S. 319 (1989)   Cited 56,198 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"

  4. Gonzales v. Raich

    545 U.S. 1 (2005)   Cited 1,147 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because “Congress had a rational basis” for concluding that a statute implements Commerce Clause power, the statute falls within the scope of congressional “authority to ‘make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper’ to ‘regulate Commerce ... among the several States' ”

  5. Collins v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter

    224 F.3d 496 (5th Cir. 2000)   Cited 3,530 times
    Holding that a court may consider “[d]ocuments that a defendant attaches to a motion to dismiss ... if they are referred to in the plaintiff's complaint and are central to her claim” (quoting Venture Assocs. Corp. v. Zenith Data Sys. Corp., 987 F.2d 429, 431 (7th Cir.1993) )

  6. Lormand v. US Unwired, Inc.

    565 F.3d 228 (5th Cir. 2009)   Cited 2,098 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that warnings "d[id] not qualify as meaningful cautionary language" because they "did not disclose that defendants knew from past experience that the [risks] posed an imminent threat of business and financial ruin and that some damage from these risks had already materialized"

  7. Lone Star Fund v. Barclays Bank

    594 F.3d 383 (5th Cir. 2010)   Cited 1,874 times
    Holding that a court considering a Rule 12(b) motion is "limited to the complaint, any documents attached to the complaint, and any documents attached to the motion to dismiss that are central to the claim and referenced by the complaint"

  8. Dorsey v. Portfolio Equities Inc.

    540 F.3d 333 (5th Cir. 2008)   Cited 1,133 times
    Holding that to satisfy Rule 9(b), a plaintiff pleading fraud must "specify the statements contended to be fraudulent, identify the speaker, state when and where the statements were made, and explain why the statements were fraudulent. Put simply, Rule 9(b) requires the complaint to set forth the who, what, when, where, and how of the events at issue."

  9. Rosenzweig v. Azurix Corp.

    332 F.3d 854 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1,001 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court did not abuse discretion in denying motion to amend complaint where "plaintiffs did not attach a proposed amended complaint," leaving district court to "speculate" about how additional facts might amount to a legal claim

  10. U.S. ex Rel. Willard v. Humana Health Plan

    336 F.3d 375 (5th Cir. 2003)   Cited 959 times
    Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in not allowing the plaintiff to amend its complaint because the plaintiff had already had two opportunities to amend their complaint

  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 348,503 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 841 - Prohibited acts A

    21 U.S.C. § 841   Cited 91,507 times   147 Legal Analyses
    In § 841 prosecutions, then, it is the fact that the doctor issued an unauthorized prescription that renders his or her conduct wrongful, not the fact of the dispensation itself.

  13. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,110 times   321 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  14. Section 1962 - Prohibited activities

    18 U.S.C. § 1962   Cited 15,961 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Specifying prohibited activities

  15. Section 1961 - Definitions

    18 U.S.C. § 1961   Cited 14,992 times   72 Legal Analyses
    Defining what the terms “person” and “enterprise” include

  16. Section 78j - Manipulative and deceptive devices

    15 U.S.C. § 78j   Cited 12,536 times   165 Legal Analyses
    Granting SEC power to establish rules to further statute forbidding manipulative or deceptive devices in connection with purchase or sale of securities

  17. Section 78u-4 - Private securities litigation

    15 U.S.C. § 78u-4   Cited 7,501 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Granting courts authority to permit discovery if necessary "to preserve evidence or to prevent undue prejudice to" a party

  18. Section 848 - Continuing criminal enterprise

    21 U.S.C. § 848   Cited 4,066 times   30 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the court's authority in certain situations to "impose a sentence, other than death, authorized by law"

  19. Section 844 - Penalties for simple possession

    21 U.S.C. § 844   Cited 2,905 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Providing for "a term of imprisonment of not more than 1 year" for possession offenses except for repeat offenders, persons who possess more than five grams of cocaine base, and persons who possess flunitrazepam

  20. Section 812 - Schedules of controlled substances

    21 U.S.C. § 812   Cited 2,828 times   75 Legal Analyses
    Criminalizing heroin

  21. Section 240.10b-5 - Employment of manipulative and deceptive devices

    17 C.F.R. § 240.10b-5   Cited 9,226 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any person who "make any untrue statement of material fact"