§Why CasetextPricing

Lamont v. Proskauer Rose LLP et al

REPLY to opposition to motion re MOTION to Dismiss

25 Cited authorities

  1. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 284,407 times   370 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

  2. Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife

    504 U.S. 555 (1992)   Cited 29,725 times   144 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

  3. Goodyear Dunlop Tires Oper. v. Brown

    564 U.S. 915 (2011)   Cited 5,693 times   88 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the sales of petitioners' tires sporadically made in North Carolina through intermediaries" insufficient to support general jurisdiction

  4. Pennhurst State School Hosp. v. Halderman

    465 U.S. 89 (1984)   Cited 14,150 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that sovereign immunity prohibits federal courts from "instruct[ing] state officials on how to conform their conduct to state law"

  5. Mireles v. Waco

    502 U.S. 9 (1991)   Cited 7,754 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that judges retain their immunity from suit when they are accused of acting maliciously or corruptly

  6. Stump v. Sparkman

    435 U.S. 349 (1978)   Cited 8,587 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a judge "will be subject to liability only when he has acted in the clear absence of all jurisdiction"

  7. Middlesex Ethics Comm. v. Garden State Bar Assn

    457 U.S. 423 (1982)   Cited 4,721 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because an important state interest was involved and no bad faith, harassment, or other exceptional circumstances dictated to the contrary, federal courts should abstain from interfering with ongoing state bar disciplinary proceedings

  8. Forrester v. White

    484 U.S. 219 (1988)   Cited 3,187 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that judges are not absolutely immune for administrative acts

  9. Butz v. Economou

    438 U.S. 478 (1978)   Cited 3,971 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that ALJs are entitled to absolute immunity from suit for damages stemming from official acts because they are "functionally comparable" to judges

  10. Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington

    326 U.S. 310 (1945)   Cited 23,331 times   113 Legal Analyses
    Holding that states may exercise personal jurisdiction over out-of-state defendants with "certain minimum contacts with [the forum] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ‘traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice’ " (quoting Milliken v. Meyer , 311 U.S. 457, 463, 61 S.Ct. 339, 85 L.Ed. 278 (1940) )

  11. Section 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights

    42 U.S.C. § 1983   Cited 512,564 times   718 Legal Analyses
    Holding liable any state actor who "subjects, or causes [a person] to be subjected" to a constitutional violation

  12. Section 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

    28 U.S.C. § 455   Cited 11,631 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth standards of recusal

  13. Section 1654 - Appearance personally or by counsel

    28 U.S.C. § 1654   Cited 5,178 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Granting defendants in federal cases the statutory right to self-representation