100 Cited authorities

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 280,791 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
Erickson v. Pardus
551 U.S. 89 (2007) Cited 65,504 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"
Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N.A.
534 U.S. 506 (2002) Cited 17,380 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"
Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz
471 U.S. 462 (1985) Cited 17,367 times 47 Legal Analyses
Holding that a defendant has "fair warning" if he purposefully directs his activities at residents of the forum and if the litigation results from alleged injuries arising out of or relating to those activities.
Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co.
526 U.S. 574 (1999) Cited 4,526 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that, because "[t]hey keep the federal courts within the bounds the Constitution and Congress have prescribed," questions concerning subject matter jurisdiction "must be policed by the courts on their own initiative even at the highest level"
World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson
444 U.S. 286 (1980) Cited 11,074 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that an Oklahoma court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over a car retailer when the retailer's only connection to Oklahoma was the fact that a car sold in New York became involved in an accident in Oklahoma
Calder v. Jones
465 U.S. 783 (1984) Cited 4,784 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding a California court had personal jurisdiction over individual defendants when the defendants had not visited the state in connection with an allegedly defamatory article and "[we]re not responsible for the circulation of the article in California"
Ins. Corp. of Ir. v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee
456 U.S. 694 (1982) Cited 4,013 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that unlike subject matter jurisdiction, a defect in personal jurisdiction can be waived
Int'l Shoe Co. v. Washington
326 U.S. 310 (1945) Cited 23,195 times 112 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) )
Hanson v. Denckla
357 U.S. 235 (1958) Cited 8,008 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida
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 362,607 times 962 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 164,455 times 197 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs
28 U.S.C. § 1332 Cited 116,150 times 572 Legal Analyses
Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"
Section 1132 - Civil enforcement
29 U.S.C. § 1132 Cited 26,791 times 175 Legal Analyses
Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner
Section 1446 - Procedure for removal of civil actions
28 U.S.C. § 1446 Cited 22,808 times 141 Legal Analyses
Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim
Section 1601 - Congressional findings and declaration of purpose
15 U.S.C. § 1601 Cited 7,941 times 55 Legal Analyses
Explaining that TILA's disclosure requirements exist “so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit”
Section 1640 - Civil liability
15 U.S.C. § 1640 Cited 4,989 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding "any creditor who fails to comply" liable, with creditors defined within § 1602(g) as persons
Section 1635 - Right of rescission as to certain transactions
15 U.S.C. § 1635 Cited 3,353 times 27 Legal Analyses
Granting consumers the right to rescind
Section 1453 - Removal of class actions
28 U.S.C. § 1453 Cited 1,403 times 109 Legal Analyses
Providing discretion to hear an appeal from a remand order
Section 1464 - Federal savings associations
12 U.S.C. § 1464 Cited 963 times 8 Legal Analyses
Granting broad authority to Office of Thrift Supervision to issue regulations governing thrifts
Section 226.23 - Right of rescission
12 C.F.R. § 226.23 Cited 1,221 times 3 Legal Analyses
Granting extended right to cancel to "consumers" in the event of nondisclosures
Section 226.17 - General disclosure requirements
12 C.F.R. § 226.17 Cited 549 times 1 Legal Analyses
Requiring that consumer receive a copy of TILA disclosures
Section 226.19 - Certain mortgage and variable-rate transactions
12 C.F.R. § 226.19 Cited 114 times
Requiring that disclosures in mortgage transactions be delivered "not later than the third business day after the creditor receives the consumer's written application"

Plascencia et al v. Lending 1st Mortgage et al

100 Cited authorities

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 a complaint must "give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests"

Holding with regard to a 67-year-old plaintiff and a 59-year-old comparator that " difference of eight years between the age of the person discharged and his replacement . . . is not insignificant"

Holding that a defendant has "fair warning" if he purposefully directs his activities at residents of the forum and if the litigation results from alleged injuries arising out of or relating to those activities.

Holding that, because "[t]hey keep the federal courts within the bounds the Constitution and Congress have prescribed," questions concerning subject matter jurisdiction "must be policed by the courts on their own initiative even at the highest level"

Holding that an Oklahoma court could not exercise personal jurisdiction over a car retailer when the retailer's only connection to Oklahoma was the fact that a car sold in New York became involved in an accident in Oklahoma

Holding a California court had personal jurisdiction over individual defendants when the defendants had not visited the state in connection with an allegedly defamatory article and "[we]re not responsible for the circulation of the article in California"

Holding that unlike subject matter jurisdiction, a defect in personal jurisdiction can be waived

Holding that personal jurisdiction over defendant trustee was inappropriate when defendant's only contacts with the forum resulted from plaintiff-settlor's unilateral activity of moving to Florida

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

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

Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner

Granting a defendant 30 days to remove after receipt of the first pleading that sets forth a removable claim

Explaining that TILA's disclosure requirements exist “so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit”

Holding "any creditor who fails to comply" liable, with creditors defined within § 1602(g) as persons

Granting consumers the right to rescind

Providing discretion to hear an appeal from a remand order

Granting broad authority to Office of Thrift Supervision to issue regulations governing thrifts

Granting extended right to cancel to "consumers" in the event of nondisclosures

Requiring that consumer receive a copy of TILA disclosures

Requiring that disclosures in mortgage transactions be delivered "not later than the third business day after the creditor receives the consumer's written application"