§Why CasetextPricing

Hukman v. US Airways/American Airlines et al

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM

25 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 252,709 times   279 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 266,625 times   365 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. Phillips v. County of Allegheny

    515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 16,822 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

  4. Buck v. Hampton Tp. Sch. Dist

    452 F.3d 256 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 1,554 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in analyzing a motion to dismiss, the court may consider documents “attached to or submitted with the complaint, and any matters incorporated by reference or integral to the claim, items subject to judicial notice, matters of public record, orders, items appearing in the record of the case.”

  5. Umland v. Planco Financial

    542 F.3d 59 (3d Cir. 2008)   Cited 989 times
    Holding that plaintiff could not bring common-law contract claim where the alleged implied contractual term reflected the provisions of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act, which did not provide a private right of action

  6. Maio v. Aetna, Inc.

    221 F.3d 472 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 1,112 times
    Holding no RICO cause of action because factual predicate necessary for damages to be incurred at all too speculative

  7. Sheridan v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.

    100 F.3d 1061 (3d Cir. 1996)   Cited 1,074 times
    Holding that a new trial should be granted only where the "great weight" of the evidence cuts against the verdict and "where a miscarriage of justice would result if the verdict were to stand."

  8. Kachmar v. Sungard Data Systems, Inc.

    109 F.3d 173 (3d Cir. 1997)   Cited 917 times
    Holding that Congress did not intend to hold individual employees liable under Title VII, which is parallel to the ADEA in many ways

  9. Antol v. Perry

    82 F.3d 1291 (3d Cir. 1996)   Cited 610 times
    Holding that the investigation "quite properly" focused on Antol's disability discrimination claim

  10. Atkinson v. Lafayette College

    460 F.3d 447 (3d Cir. 2006)   Cited 373 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding claims under PHRA are interpreted coextensively with those arising under Title VII

  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 345,885 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 156,205 times   193 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  13. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 108,094 times   195 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  14. Section 2000e-5 - Enforcement provisions

    42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5   Cited 26,879 times   124 Legal Analyses
    Holding charges must be made in writing, under oath, and contain all information as the Commission requires

  15. Rule 10 - Form of Pleadings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 10   Cited 19,486 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding exhibits attached to complaint may be treated as part of complaint for purposes of ruling on 12(b) motion