18 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 251,360 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
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 265,336 times 364 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' "
Raspardo v. Carlone
770 F.3d 97 (2d Cir. 2014) Cited 701 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in discrimination cases "brought pursuant to § 1983, liability for an Equal Protection Clause violation requires personal involvement by a defendant, who must act with discriminatory purpose"
Cox v. Adm' U.S. Steel & Carnegie
17 F.3d 1386 (11th Cir. 1994) Cited 813 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Eleventh Circuit does not follow the non-identity rule, and noting that it would permit vicarious liability even if it did follow the non-identity rule
American Tobacco Co. v. U.S.
328 U.S. 781 (1946) Cited 1,002 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding Braverman inapplicable where two distinct conspiracies alleged
Halberstam v. Welch
705 F.2d 472 (D.C. Cir. 1983) Cited 514 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding the defendant must have "knowingly and substantially assist[ed] the principal violation"
Aetna Casualty, Surety v. Leahey Constr. Co.
219 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2000) Cited 198 times
Holding that under Ohio law, "requisite intent and knowledge may be shown by circumstantial evidence"
Cabello v. Fernandez-Larios
402 F.3d 1148 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 134 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the objection was waived "[b]ecause the defect . . . could have been cured at the taking of the deposition"
Doe v. Drummond Co.
782 F.3d 576 (11th Cir. 2015) Cited 79 times
Holding that corporate liability under the ATS is a jurisdictional question
Burrell v. Bd. of Trustees of Ga. Military
970 F.2d 785 (11th Cir. 1992) Cited 148 times
Finding qualified immunity does not apply to section 1985

In Re: Chiquita Brands International, Inc., Alien Tort Statute and Shareholders Derivative Litigation

18 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, in discrimination cases "brought pursuant to § 1983, liability for an Equal Protection Clause violation requires personal involvement by a defendant, who must act with discriminatory purpose"

Holding that the Eleventh Circuit does not follow the non-identity rule, and noting that it would permit vicarious liability even if it did follow the non-identity rule

Holding Braverman inapplicable where two distinct conspiracies alleged

Holding the defendant must have "knowingly and substantially assist[ed] the principal violation"

Holding that under Ohio law, "requisite intent and knowledge may be shown by circumstantial evidence"

Holding that the objection was waived "[b]ecause the defect . . . could have been cured at the taking of the deposition"

Holding that corporate liability under the ATS is a jurisdictional question

Finding qualified immunity does not apply to section 1985