16 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 263,477 times 281 Legal Analyses
Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 276,716 times 369 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
Robbins v. Oklahoma
519 F.3d 1242 (10th Cir. 2008) Cited 5,992 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that collective allegations do not satisfy a plaintiff's "burden . . . to provide fair notice of the grounds for the claims made against each of the defendants"
Davis v. Coca-Cola Bottling
516 F.3d 955 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 970 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that hiring decisions were "discrete acts of discrimination" that could not go forward under the continuing-violation doctrine
Magluta v. Samples
256 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 2001) Cited 541 times
Holding that a complaint was a shotgun complaint when, among other issues, the complaint was 58-pages long and contained at least 146 numbered paragraphs
Paylor v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co.
748 F.3d 1117 (11th Cir. 2014) Cited 208 times 6 Legal Analyses
Stating that a shotgun pleading occurs where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts
Bickley ex rel. Georgia Pacific Corp. Life Health & Accident Plan v. Caremark RX, Inc.
461 F.3d 1325 (11th Cir. 2006) Cited 195 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of futility were speculative because the claimant did not attempt to appeal
LaCroix v. Western District of Kentucky
627 F. App'x 816 (11th Cir. 2015) Cited 122 times
Upholding dismissal of a shotgun pleading complaint for failure to comply with Rule 8
Pierson v. Orlando Regional Healthcare Systems
No. 6:08-cv-466-Orl-28GJK (M.D. Fla. Apr. 28, 2009) Cited 34 times
In Pierson, the Middle District of Florida determined that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead claims against a set of individuals and groups he collectively referred to as “the Peer Review Defendants” without differentiation of each defendant's alleged conduct.
Austin v. Woodman
275 F. App'x 925 (11th Cir. 2008) Cited 27 times
Holding that because the district court did not consider matters outside the pleadings, it did not err when it failed to treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 162,084 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

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

16 Cited authorities

Holding court need not credit "mere conclusory statements" in complaint

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

Holding that collective allegations do not satisfy a plaintiff's "burden . . . to provide fair notice of the grounds for the claims made against each of the defendants"

Holding that hiring decisions were "discrete acts of discrimination" that could not go forward under the continuing-violation doctrine

Holding that a complaint was a shotgun complaint when, among other issues, the complaint was 58-pages long and contained at least 146 numbered paragraphs

Stating that a shotgun pleading occurs where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts

Holding that allegations of futility were speculative because the claimant did not attempt to appeal

Upholding dismissal of a shotgun pleading complaint for failure to comply with Rule 8

In Pierson, the Middle District of Florida determined that the plaintiff failed to sufficiently plead claims against a set of individuals and groups he collectively referred to as “the Peer Review Defendants” without differentiation of each defendant's alleged conduct.

Holding that because the district court did not consider matters outside the pleadings, it did not err when it failed to treat the motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment

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