550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 268,482 times 366 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' "
Holding that per se "hub and spoke" theory was not properly pled when complaint detailed specific agreements between multiple insurers and a single broker, but did not allege facts such that the court could infer that the insurers had agreed horizontally to enter into their respective agreements with the broker
Holding the complaint "does not identify [the who, what, when, where, and how] with respect to a single allegation of mail or wire fraud; in fact the Complaint fails to specify a single date with respect to any such allegation" (alteration in original)
Holding that scheme to defraud only two victims did not constitute RICO violation but implying that claim alleging 27 victims of same scheme would suffice
Holding that debtor held funds subject to express trust under Virginia law where contractual language and circumstances under which debtor received funds showed that parties intended debtor “to act merely as an intermediary” without any expectation that debtor would keep the funds or “develop any equitable interest in the funds”
Holding that the statutory scheme of the SCA "leaves no room" for a civil action under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO") and a claim "couched under" RICO is preempted