23 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 253,227 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
Phillips v. County of Allegheny
515 F.3d 224 (3d Cir. 2008) Cited 16,859 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile
Sedima, S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co.
473 U.S. 479 (1985) Cited 4,230 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."
In re Burlington Coat Factory
114 F.3d 1410 (3d Cir. 1997) Cited 7,662 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court may consider a "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint" when deciding a motion to dismiss
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc.
998 F.2d 1192 (3d Cir. 1993) Cited 6,183 times
Holding that, when reviewing a motion to dismiss, courts consider "allegations contained in the complaint, exhibits attached to the complaint and matters of public record"
Lightning Lube, Inc. v. Witco Corp.
4 F.3d 1153 (3d Cir. 1993) Cited 1,163 times
Holding that the owner of a small business may testify as a lay witness regarding the projected future profits of his business
In re Rockefeller Ctr. Props.
184 F.3d 280 (3d Cir. 1999) Cited 750 times
Holding that “[t]he parties can take advantage of this opportunity only if they have ‘notice of the conversion'” which is “unambiguous” and “fairly apprise the parties that the court intends to convert the motion”
Garvin v. City of Philadelphia
354 F.3d 215 (3d Cir. 2003) Cited 454 times
Holding that police officers do not rank high enough in the municipal hierarchy to permit the conclusion that they have an identity of interest with the municipality for purposes of notice
Pittsburgh Constr. Co. v. Griffith
2003 Pa. Super. 374 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2003) Cited 214 times
Holding that the plaintiff's “tort and breach of contract claims [were] inextricably intertwined, the success of the conversion claim depending entirely on the obligations as defined by the contract”
McKeeman v. Corestates Bank, N.A.
2000 Pa. Super. 117 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2000) Cited 208 times
Holding that a plaintiff claiming civil conspiracy must also include a cause of action for the particular act which the defendants conspired to commit
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 346,412 times 923 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 90,683 times 91 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters
Fed. R. Civ. P. 9 Cited 38,956 times 317 Legal Analyses
Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"
Section 1962 - Prohibited activities
18 U.S.C. § 1962 Cited 15,897 times 60 Legal Analyses
Specifying prohibited activities

Laurel Gardens, Llc et al v. Mckenna et al

23 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 district court need not permit a curative amendment if such amendment would be futile

Holding that the fact that a statute can be "applied in situations not expressly anticipated by Congress does not demonstrate ambiguity. It demonstrates breadth."

Holding that a court may consider a "document integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint" when deciding a motion to dismiss

Holding that, when reviewing a motion to dismiss, courts consider "allegations contained in the complaint, exhibits attached to the complaint and matters of public record"

Holding that the owner of a small business may testify as a lay witness regarding the projected future profits of his business

Holding that “[t]he parties can take advantage of this opportunity only if they have ‘notice of the conversion'” which is “unambiguous” and “fairly apprise the parties that the court intends to convert the motion”

Holding that police officers do not rank high enough in the municipal hierarchy to permit the conclusion that they have an identity of interest with the municipality for purposes of notice

Holding that the plaintiff's “tort and breach of contract claims [were] inextricably intertwined, the success of the conversion claim depending entirely on the obligations as defined by the contract”

Holding that a plaintiff claiming civil conspiracy must also include a cause of action for the particular act which the defendants conspired to commit

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

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Permitting "[m]alice, intent, knowledge, and other conditions of a person's mind [to] be alleged generally"

Specifying prohibited activities