§Why CasetextPricing

Parker Auto Body Inc et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co et al

MOTION to Dismiss First Amended Complaint

25 Cited authorities

  1. Ashcroft v. Iqbal

    556 U.S. 662 (2009)   Cited 251,437 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

  2. Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly

    550 U.S. 544 (2007)   Cited 265,409 times   364 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' "

  3. Columbia v. Omni Outdoor Advertising, Inc.

    499 U.S. 365 (1991)   Cited 549 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that there is no "conspiracy" exception to the Noerr-Pennington doctrine

  4. Corsello v. Lincare, Inc.

    428 F.3d 1008 (11th Cir. 2005)   Cited 534 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that trial court did not err in denying relator's request to file an amended complaint where there was a repeated failure to cure deficiencies in three prior complaints

  5. In re Baby Food Antitrust Litigation

    166 F.3d 112 (3d Cir. 1999)   Cited 221 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court properly discounted evidence about allegedly collusive communications where, among other things, the defendant receiving those communications "generally did not act on any information obtained through" them

  6. Todorov v. DCH Healthcare Authority

    921 F.2d 1438 (11th Cir. 1991)   Cited 204 times
    Holding doctor's interests were not aligned with patients' interests, where doctor would benefit from radiologists' inflated prices; patients, their insurers, or government were interested in ensuring consumers paid competitive price, and they could bring antitrust action

  7. In re Graphics Processing Units Antitrust Litigation

    527 F. Supp. 2d 1011 (N.D. Cal. 2007)   Cited 113 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that subpoenas served on defendants and grand jury investigation carry no weight in pleading antitrust conspiracy where it is unknown whether investigation will result in indictments or nothing at all, also noting that a decision not to prosecute would not be binding on plaintiffs, and granting leave to amend

  8. Bethea v. St. Paul Guardian Insurance Co.

    376 F.3d 399 (5th Cir. 2004)   Cited 107 times
    Holding that Louisiana law barred the plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim due to the existence of a valid contract defining the plaintiff's insurance coverage

  9. Levine v. Central Florida Medical Affiliates

    72 F.3d 1538 (11th Cir. 1996)   Cited 107 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a buyer network does not engage in price fixing prohibited by the Sherman Act if it agrees on a maximum price it is willing to pay for a product and sellers decide whether to accept that price

  10. JCD Marketing Co. v. Bass Hotels & Resorts, Inc.

    812 So. 2d 834 (La. Ct. App. 2002)   Cited 73 times
    Holding that interference in the hope of re-sale at higher profit is the "very type of profit maximization conduct that has been held insufficient to satisfy the malice element."

  11. 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 344,481 times   920 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 155,481 times   193 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."