§Why CasetextPricing

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

RESPONSE in Opposition re

39 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 260,142 times   281 Legal Analyses
    Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 273,590 times   368 Legal Analyses
    Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing

  3. Swanson v. Citibank

    614 F.3d 400 (7th Cir. 2010)   Cited 2,060 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding plaintiff stated a claim under § 3605

  4. Rodríguez-Reyes v. Molina-Rodríguez

    711 F.3d 49 (1st Cir. 2013)   Cited 709 times
    Finding that adverse employment action less than two months or “[a]t the earliest practical opportunity” after the regime change had adequate temporal proximity to support an inference of political animus

  5. García-Catalan v. United States

    734 F.3d 100 (1st Cir. 2013)   Cited 608 times
    Holding that a complaint containing information equivalent to that required by Form 11 raised a plausible claim of negligence

  6. Cox v. Adm' U.S. Steel & Carnegie

    17 F.3d 1386 (11th Cir. 1994)   Cited 837 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

  7. Halberstam v. Welch

    705 F.2d 472 (D.C. Cir. 1983)   Cited 522 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding the defendant must have "knowingly and substantially assist[ed] the principal violation"

  8. Ali v. Cangemi

    419 F.3d 722 (8th Cir. 2005)   Cited 213 times
    Holding petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus, challenging his extended detention while awaiting deportation, "prudentially moot" by alien's mistaken release from custody

  9. Aetna Casualty, Surety v. Leahey Constr. Co.

    219 F.3d 519 (6th Cir. 2000)   Cited 202 times
    Holding that under Ohio law, "requisite intent and knowledge may be shown by circumstantial evidence"

  10. Arce v. Garcia

    434 F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2006)   Cited 171 times
    Finding the interests of justice can weigh in favor of allowing a plaintiff to assert an untimely claim if circumstances beyond the plaintiff's control prevented timely filing

  11. Rule 4 - Summons

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 4   Cited 71,368 times   127 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

  12. Rule 25 - Substitution of Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 25   Cited 10,999 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Providing for the automatic substitution at the district-court level of public officers sued in their official capacities

  13. Section 20-903 - Limitation on presentation of claims against the estate

    D.C. Code § 20-903   Cited 17 times
    Discussing limitations on presentation of claims against the estate

  14. Section 20-704 - Notice of appointment to interested persons, creditors and unknown heirs

    D.C. Code § 20-704   Cited 8 times

    (a) Within 20 days after appointment, the personal representative shall, unless notice has already been given under this subsection, publish a notice of the appointment in a newspaper of general circulation of the District of Columbia and any other publication the Court may order or provide by Rule once a week for 3 successive weeks. This notice shall announce the appointment and address of the personal representative, state whether administration is supervised or unsupervised, and notify creditors

  15. Section 20-743 - Improper exercise of power; breach of fiduciary duty

    D.C. Code § 20-743   Cited 6 times

    If any personal representative's exercise of power concerning the estate is improper, such representative is liable for breach of fiduciary duty to interested persons for resulting damage or loss to the same extent as a trustee of an express trust. The exercise of power in violation of a Court order, or contrary to the provisions of the will may be a breach of duty. The rights of purchasers and others dealing with a personal representative are determined as provided in section 20-744 and are not

  16. Section 20-908 - Action on claims; remedy for failure to act

    D.C. Code § 20-908   Cited 4 times

    (a) For claims presented as provided in section 20-905 within the time limit prescribed by section 20-903, the personal representative shall mail a notice to each claimant stating (1) that the claim has been allowed in a stated amount; (2) that the claim has been disallowed in whole or in part and advising the claimant of the procedures and time limitations for contesting such disallowance; or (3) that the personal representative will petition the Court to determine whether the claim should be allowed

  17. Section 20-735 - Optional proceedings, terminating unsupervised administration; testate or intestate; Certificate of Completion

    D.C. Code § 20-735   Cited 2 times

    (a) Unless otherwise ordered by the Court for good cause shown in a particular matter, the personal representative in an unsupervised administration shall close the estate by filing with the Court a Certificate of Completion, which shall be verified and in a form prescribed by the Court. Such Certificate may be filed at any time, but in no event prior to the expiration of the time for filing creditors' claims against the estate. (b) The Certificate of Completion shall include a statement that: (1)

  18. Section 20-1302 - Liability of heir or legatee to creditor

    D.C. Code § 20-1302   Cited 1 times

    After an estate has been closed, a claim not barred may be brought against one or more of the persons to whom property has been distributed. An heir or legatee shall not be liable to claimants for any amount in excess of the value of the property distributed to such heir or legatee, valued at the time of distribution or the time of filing suit, whichever is lower. An heir or legatee shall have a right of contribution against other heirs or legatees and, as between them, each shall bear the cost of