38 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 257,305 times 280 Legal Analyses
Holding for a complaint to survive Rule 12(b), it must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face"
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 270,937 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' "
Day v. Taylor
400 F.3d 1272 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 1,000 times
Holding that the district "court may consider a document attached to a" motion to dismiss without converting the motion into one for summary judgment if the attached document is central to the plaintiffs claim and undisputed"
Dalton v. Educ. Testing Serv
87 N.Y.2d 384 (N.Y. 1995) Cited 894 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that defendant testing service breached the implied covenant by ignoring evidence it invited the plaintiff to submit
Merrill Lynch v. Allegheny Energy
500 F.3d 171 (2d Cir. 2007) Cited 522 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that "resolution of legal questions, including jurisdiction and the right to a jury trial, are subject to de novo review"
Harris v. Provident Life and Acc. Ins. Co.
310 F.3d 73 (2d Cir. 2002) Cited 518 times
Holding that a genuine issue of fact as to whether plaintiff was disabled and unable to work as a result of her disability and thus, entitled to benefits under an insurance policy with defendant precluded summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of contract claim
Kass v. Kass
91 N.Y.2d 554 (N.Y. 1998) Cited 553 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the parties’ agreement controlled
Maxcess, Inc. v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.
433 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 405 times
Holding that such extrinsic evidence can be considered at the motion to dismiss stage if the above factors are met and even if it is not mentioned in or attached to the complaint
Furia v. Furia
116 A.D.2d 694 (N.Y. App. Div. 1986) Cited 651 times
January 27, 1986 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Fierro, J.). Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs. The instant complaint is the seventh asserted against the defendant Arnold Furia based upon an alleged 1976 agreement between defendant and plaintiffs Russell Furia and Peter George. In the instant complaint plaintiffs allege that under the terms of the agreement, they provided certain services and materials during the period from July 1976 through December 1980 to develop
Merritt Hill Vineyards Inc. v. Windy Heights Vineyard, Inc.
61 N.Y.2d 106 (N.Y. 1984) Cited 501 times
Holding that without "words of promise" there can be no "breach of contract subjecting the nonfulfilling party to liability for damages"
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 351,086 times 937 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 158,801 times 196 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose
Fed. R. Civ. P. 1 Cited 15,276 times 49 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

In Re: Fontainebleau Las Vegas Contract Litigation

38 Cited authorities

Holding for a complaint to survive Rule 12(b), it must "state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face"

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 the district "court may consider a document attached to a" motion to dismiss without converting the motion into one for summary judgment if the attached document is central to the plaintiffs claim and undisputed"

Holding that defendant testing service breached the implied covenant by ignoring evidence it invited the plaintiff to submit

Holding that "resolution of legal questions, including jurisdiction and the right to a jury trial, are subject to de novo review"

Holding that a genuine issue of fact as to whether plaintiff was disabled and unable to work as a result of her disability and thus, entitled to benefits under an insurance policy with defendant precluded summary judgment on plaintiff's breach of contract claim

Holding that the parties’ agreement controlled

Holding that such extrinsic evidence can be considered at the motion to dismiss stage if the above factors are met and even if it is not mentioned in or attached to the complaint

Holding that without "words of promise" there can be no "breach of contract subjecting the nonfulfilling party to liability for damages"

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"